The clear implication was that since Iscool can't figure it out, it's obvious nonsense. And then he settled back into his utterly carnal (as opposed to spiritual) understanding -- the lazy man's Nestorianism:
Mary provided the flesh for a house for God...
. . . which he states in a downright manner that at least sounds as if he thinks he understands it.
Granted, he's not the most articulate poster, but that's what I got out of it.
“The clear implication was that since Iscool can’t figure it out, it’s obvious nonsense.”
Really? Not so clear to me. Not at all. I read it as it was written. If that’s what you’re seeing, it seems to me to be a stretch.
“the lazy man’s Nestorianism:
Mary provided the flesh for a house for God...”
Again, this seems to be a misrepresentation. Sorry, but it does.
As for him being inarticulate, I have to disagree heartily. The posts Iscool makes have been cogent.... and cite-able in scripture.
Hoss