[calebjosh]

One wonders why they were not protected from conspicuous ommission, if that's the case. Mark overlooked mentioning the Virgin Birth, an event one doesn't encounter every day.

There was no need for the Holy Spirit to rehash this issue, as He'd already inspired Matthew and Luke to detail exhaustively in their writings with with the virgin birth. It's clear by your arguments that you've entered in with a faulty premise. "That being"--- that the Bible is NOT inspired of God, but entirely man made.

[Pahuanui]

There was no need for the Holy Spirit to rehash this issue, as He'd already inspired Matthew and Luke to detail exhaustively in their writings with with the virgin birth.

Since Mark is the earliest gospel, exactly how would the writings of Matthew and/or Luke be 'rehashes', since the subject had not yet come up in Mark? Not only is your assumption illogical, but it's just too easy a way out of the problem without really addressing it.

It's clear by your arguments that you've entered in with a faulty premise. "That being"--- that the Bible is NOT inspired of God, but entirely man made.

How, precisely, is that a faulty premise, and how did you arrive at the assumed conclusion that that accurately reflects my position?