View previous topic | View next topic

Fire & Freezing: Immaculate Conception

Page 1 of 1

eggshaped
328961.  Fri May 02, 2008 10:55 am Reply with quote

Question: Finally, back to the true meaning of Christmas - Who had an immaculate conception?

Forfeit: Mary

Answer: Saint Anne had an immaculate conception when she conceived Mary without any original sin. This should not be confused with the virginal conception of Jesus by Mary.


Notes:
The Immaculate Conception is a piece of religious dogma that has nothing to do with the virgin birth of Jesus, it is to do with the sinless birth of Mary: Saint Anne had an immaculate conception when she conceived Mary without any original sin. The doctrine was proclaimed in 1854, at the First Vatican Council by Pope Pius IX – it was the same one that decided the Pope was infallible.

Original sin was the stigma that tainted Eve and all subsequent newborn humans after the expulsion from the Garden of Eden. However God decided that His son should really be born from somewhere very pure, so He decided to ensure that Mary (and by extension Jesus himself) would be born without sin.

The conception of Jesus is celebrated in the feast of the Annunciation, when Mary was told by the Angel Gabriel that she will give birth to the son of God. This takes place on March 25th, nine months before Christmas Day: The feast of the Immaculate Conception takes place on 8th December – unsurprisingly nine months before the celebration of Mary’s birthday.

In 1998, a number of newspapers reported that over 10,000 virgins had bought an insurance policy against Immaculate Conception in anticipation of the second coming in 2000. The story smells suspicious, not least because presumably they thought they were insuring against virgin birth rather than against their child being born without original sin. Reports claimed that women called Mary or Maria were most susceptible to buying such insurance.

Further Sources:
http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G1-55056933.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/142982.stm
http://heritage.scotsman.com/ufos/All-Nessiesary-precautions.2254679.jp

Picture Ideas:
Mary, Saint Anne, Jesus and all that jazz.

 
vonxxx
849313.  Fri Sep 23, 2011 4:07 am Reply with quote

An article printed in The American Medical Weekly 7November 1874.

According to Dr. T.G Capers of Vicksberg 'The event began during the battle of Raymond, Missippi 12 May 1863. A soldier friend of Dr Capers was hit in the scrotum by a bullet that carried off his left testicle.The same bullet penetrated the left side of a 17yr old girl in a nearby house.278days later, much to the surprise of everyone, most of all herself, she gave birth to an 8lbs boy.Three weeks later the good Dr operated on the child and removed a bullet. He told the soldier who skeptically consented to visit the young lady. They stuck up a friendship and later married havin 3 more children, none of whom resembaled the soldier as much as the first.

 
monzac
849333.  Fri Sep 23, 2011 5:23 am Reply with quote

eggshaped wrote:
Question: Finally, back to the true meaning of Christmas - Who had an immaculate conception?

Forfeit: Mary

Answer: Saint Anne had an immaculate conception when she conceived Mary without any original sin. This should not be confused with the virginal conception of Jesus by Mary.


Notes:
The Immaculate Conception is a piece of religious dogma that has nothing to do with the virgin birth of Jesus, it is to do with the sinless birth of Mary: Saint Anne had an immaculate conception when she conceived Mary without any original sin. The doctrine was proclaimed in 1854, at the First Vatican Council by Pope Pius IX – it was the same one that decided the Pope was infallible.

Original sin was the stigma that tainted Eve and all subsequent newborn humans after the expulsion from the Garden of Eden. However God decided that His son should really be born from somewhere very pure, so He decided to ensure that Mary (and by extension Jesus himself) would be born without sin.

The conception of Jesus is celebrated in the feast of the Annunciation, when Mary was told by the Angel Gabriel that she will give birth to the son of God. This takes place on March 25th, nine months before Christmas Day: The feast of the Immaculate Conception takes place on 8th December – unsurprisingly nine months before the celebration of Mary’s birthday.

In 1998, a number of newspapers reported that over 10,000 virgins had bought an insurance policy against Immaculate Conception in anticipation of the second coming in 2000. The story smells suspicious, not least because presumably they thought they were insuring against virgin birth rather than against their child being born without original sin. Reports claimed that women called Mary or Maria were most susceptible to buying such insurance.

Further Sources:
http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G1-55056933.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/142982.stm
http://heritage.scotsman.com/ufos/All-Nessiesary-precautions.2254679.jp

Picture Ideas:
Mary, Saint Anne, Jesus and all that jazz.

Mary had an immaculate conception. She was conceived without sin, as the story goes. If had a(n immaculate) conception means became pregnant with, who was the product of Jesus' conception?

 
hassan el kebir
849344.  Fri Sep 23, 2011 6:09 am Reply with quote



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:The_Pope_and_Bovril.jpg



Hopefully one of those links will work.


;-)

 
'yorz
849349.  Fri Sep 23, 2011 6:29 am Reply with quote

All this stuff with conceptions confuses the hell out of me. I was told that Mary begat Jesus without Joseph's sperm. I thought that the fact that there was no mess made it immaculate.

 
CB27
849362.  Fri Sep 23, 2011 7:02 am Reply with quote

With regards to the story from 1874, it's true that it was published, but it was actually a joke piece written by Dr Capers as a way of explaining the origni of the term "Son of a gun", but thsi term had existed long before this would have taken place.

 
suze
849427.  Fri Sep 23, 2011 10:37 am Reply with quote

CB, do you have a source for the tale being apocryphal? The story about the guy who was shot in the scrotum is reasonably well known, and is in one of the Books of Lists (the grey one, I think), where it is presented as fact.

 
CB27
849460.  Fri Sep 23, 2011 12:02 pm Reply with quote

I can't get hold of an imager for the relevant articles in "The American Medical Weekly" and have had to go from excerpts that have been retyped, but the original article from 7th November 1874 went like this:

Quote:
ATTENTION GYNAECOLOGISTS!--NOTES FROM THE DIARY OF A FIELD AND HOSPITAL SURGEON, C.S.A.

by L.G. Capers, M.D., Vicksburg, Miss.
How common it is now-a-days, and how natural, too, for men to tell wonderful stories about "the war"; their desperate charges; hair-breadth escapes; numbers who have fallen victims to their feats of personal valor, etc., etc. Then every surgeon has performed any number of wonderful operations before unheard of in the annals of surgery!

Until the present moment, I have refrained from bringing before the public, and more particularly the Profession, any of my daring exploits or remarkable surgical procedures; and even now I feel a delicacy in offering the remarkable case, the relation of which is prompted only by a sense of duty to my professional brethren. Doubtless many will pronounce the facts to be presently related as unusual or impossible; to such I need only say, if not, why not?

Here are the proofs:

On the 12th day of May, 1863, the battle of R. was fought. Gen. G.'s brigade met the advance of Grant's army, under Gen. L., about one mile from the village of R. About three hundred yards in rear of my regiment was situated a fine residence, the occupants being a matron, her two daughters, and servants (the host being absent in another army). About 3 o'clock P.M., when the battle was raging most furiously, the above-mentioned lady and her two daughters (aged respectively fifteen and seventeen), filled with interest and enthusiasm, stood bravely in front of their homestead, ready and eager to minister to their wounded countrymen whould they fall in the dreadful fray.

Our men were fighting nobly, but pressed by superior numbers, had gradually fallen back to within one hundred and fifty yards of the house. My position being near my regiment, suddenly I beheld a noble, gallant young friend staggering closer, and then fall to the earth. In the same moment a piercing scream from the house reached my ear! I was soon by the side of the young man, and, upon examination, found a compound fracture, with extensive comminution of the left tibia; the ball having ricochetted from these parts, and, in its onward flight, passed through the scrotum, carrying away the left testicle. Scarcely had I finished dressing the wounds of this poor fellow, when the estimable matron came running to me in the greatest distress, begging me to go to one of her daughters, who, she informed me, had been badly wounded a few minutes before. Hastening to the house, I found that the eldest of the young ladies had indeed received a most serious wound. A minnie ball had penetrated the left abdominal parietes, about midway between the umbilicus and anterior spinal process of the ilium, and was lost in the abdominal cavity, leaving a ragged wound behind. Believing there was little or no hope of her recovery, I had only time to prescribe an anodyne, when our army fell back, leaving both field and village in the hands of the enemy.

Having remained with my wounded at the village of R., I had the opportunity of visiting the young lady the next day, and, interruptedly, for a period of nearly two months, at the end of which time she had entirely recovered, with no untoward symptoms during treatment; save a severe peritonitis, she seemed as well as ever!

About six months after her recovery, the movements of our army brought me again to the village of R., and I was again sent for to see the young lady. She appeared in excellent health and spirits, but her abdomen had become enormously enlarged, so much so as to resemble pregnancy at the seventh or eighth month. Indeed, had I not known the family and the facts of the abdominal wound, I should have so pronounced the case. Under the above circumstances, I failed to give a positive diagnosis, determining to keep the case under surveillance. This I did.

Just two hundred and seventy-eight days from the date of the receipt of the wound by the minnie ball, I delivered this same young lady of a fine boy, weighing eight pounds. I was not very much surprised; but imagine the surprise and mortification of the young lady herself, her entire family. This can be better imagined than described. Although I found the hymen intact in my examination before delivery, I gave no credence to the earnest and oft-repeated assertions of the young lady of her innocence and virgin purity.

About three weeks from the date of this remarkable birth, I was called to see the child, the grandmother insisting there was "something wrong about the genitals." Examination revealed an enlarged, swollen, sensitive scrotum, containing on the right side a hard, roughened substance, evidently foreign. I decided upon operating for its removal at once, and in so doing, extracted from the scrotum a minnie ball, mashed and battered as if it had met in its flight some hard, unyielding substance.

To attempt to picture my astonishment would be impossible! What may already seem very plain to my readers, as they glance over this paper, was, to me, at the time, mysterious. It was only after several days and nights of sleepless reflection that a solution flashed before me, and ever since has appeared as clear as the noon-day sun!

"What is it?" The ball I took from the scrotum of the babe was the identical one which, on the 12th of May, shattered the tibia of my young friend, and in its mutilated condition, plunged through his testicle, carrying with it particles of semen and spermatozoa into the abdomen of the young lady, then through her left ovary, and into the uterus, in this manner impregnating her! There can be no other solution of the phenomenon! These convictions I expressed to the family, and, at their solicitations, visited my young soldier friend, laying the case before him in its proper light. At first, most naturally, he appeared skeptical, but concluded to visit the young mother. Whether convinced or not, he soon married her, ere the little boy had attained his fourth month.

As a matter of additional interest, I may mention having received a letter during the past year, reporting a happy married state and three children, but neither resembling, to the same marked degree, as the first -- our hero -- Pater familias!

The style of writing would have suggested to me some sort of leg pull anyway, but the mention of the baby boy having the shot in his scrotum is totally unbelievable.

2 weeks later, on 21st November 1874, the following appeared from the editor:

Quote:
Editor's note

DR. L.G. CAPERS, of Vicksburg, Miss., disclaims responsibility for the truth of that remarkable case of impregnation by a minnie ball, as reported in No. 19 of this Journal. He tells the story as it was told to him. He does not say it is untrue, but is disposed to appositely remember the truth of the old adage, that "accidents may happen in the best regulated families." The joke is, that the Doctor reported the case without any signature, but as the editor is indisposed to be made the victim of canards, and recognized the writing sent, he was unwilling to deprive the author of the contemplated fun, and allowed him to enjoy even more of this than was anticipated. The readers have enjoyed the story much, but not enough "to cut capers" after reading it.

In 1898, in the book "Anomalies and Curiosities of Medicine", the authors quoted the Lancet report which itself quoted the original. Google has a later edition on line, and you can see the entry on page 27 (from about halfway down the page): http://tinyurl.com/3g4zml7. It seems it was seen as a hoax by others quite early on.

 

Page 1 of 1

All times are GMT - 5 Hours


Display posts from previous:   

Search Search Forums

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group