Posted on 10/15/2001 6:54:40 AM PDT by malakhi
| Statesmen may plan and speculate for liberty, but it is religion and morality alone which can establish the principles upon which freedom can securely stand. The only foundation of a free constitution is pure virtue. - John Adams |
The Trinity is made up of :
God the Father, Christ the Son, and the Holy Spirit ?
or
God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit?
.
Which do you choose? Your previous answer implies a seperation between "Christ" and "God".
I say he can be one person with a mortal earthly mother. Your interpretation takes more faith.
There is no both. There is only One Son of God. And His mother is fully human, fully mortal. The implication of this truth, the truth that is the central miracle of Christianity - the Incarnation, is that His mother is the Mother of God.
Your mistake is in projecting normal, mortal rules of what motherhood means on to the ever-unique event of the birth of God from a mortal woman. Among mortals, the mother of course pre-exists the child. But if the Child is God, this does not apply.
I took my granddaughter to a movie.. when I got home it was tied at 17..
I think I have a future in Vegas..*grin*..
My next prediction is about a girl named Grace :>))
No, my interpretation is the same as yours. Mary is fully and completely a "mortal earthly mother."
I choose the latter and disagree my interpretation implies a separation. Your saying God can't become flesh by being born from a mortal. I say he's God and can do anything he wants. You've got the problem of Mary's parents having original sin as well. Since we inherited or nature from Adam so did Mary's parents.
You mistake is adding things to scripture which are just not there.
What am I adding to Scripture?
Just to clarify, the Orthodox do not accept any doctrine like the RC doctrine of Immaculate Conception. We do not believe that Mary was anything more or less than a fully normal mortal woman. To believe otherwise breaks down the joining of the fully Divine with the fully mortal.
Interesting difference and I can see the ethic of it; however, it could also be seen as allowing the other to hold you hostage. True forgiveness has value regardless of the response of the forgiven.
Well ok. Doesn't sound like I have a beef with you. Do I?
What a game! I'm glad the Patriots won, I was getting sick of hearing about how great St Louis was. Those little buggers just find a way to win. They get the points where they can find 'em and have a tough defense to keep you off your game.
Way to go Patriots! (Now the Steelers don't look so silly.) I hope that next year at this time people will finally stop blabbering about how strong the NFC is and how weka the AFC is. It has now been, what?, 4 or 5 years with the AFC winning, the only exception being the Rams. But even they were three yards from a tie game at the end.
Face it, there is no NFC dominance anymore.
SD
The logical gymnastics are entertaining.
It's a simple formula from freshman logic courses "If A implies B and B equals C than A implies C"
If Mary is the Mother of Jesus and Jesus = God. Than Mary is the Mother of God.
The logic can be broken in one of two ways. Either Mary is not the Mother of Jesus. Or Jesus is not God. Arguments that seem to differentiate between Mother of Jesus and Mother of God imply that the speaker does not believe that Jesus is God (fitting my response to your first argument). Arguments like your second that speak of "natures" attempt to say that Mary was not, in fact, the mother of Jesus. That Jesus was 50% God and 50% Man when we know that it is not so. Such argument are based on human reasoning and opperate in reverse: "We know that Mary can't be very important because those darn Catholics like her so much, so she can't be mother of God"
But you still deny the title "Theotokos," so you do have a beef.
Is Jesus one person or two?
SD
So it is two challenges, one to show an effect on faith and morals, the other to show that any claims about Church authority (temporal) were profoundly influenced by the decretals.
Then both are already accomplished. The Church had no legit claim to land or title before the decretals nor to any "temporal" authority. The Decretals bought them believeability they did not have without them. No one doubts that these men were making claims prior to the advent of the decretals. But no one paid any real attention until the would be 'official' documented 'proof' popped up out of the blue. That temporal authority vested in the Church the ability to proscribe things they would not otherwise have been able to proscribe - period.
Proof, Havoc? I am not taking your word for it. Sorry. The challenge is not to provide an opinion, but to provide proof.
As to matters of faith and morals, Absent temporal power, the Popes never would have been able to foist the teachings and deeds of the inquisitions upon the world. Let's don't forget that 8 laws were contained in the decretals that specifically address the right of the church to do away with heretics (that's putting it nicely). This is both a matter of faith and morals and was made so by Papal Bull.
It has not been shown that Church policy on heretics is a matter of faith and morals.
But more explicitly, the "decrees of same" are forged decrees going straight to matters of faith and morals. Forged matters of doctrine by virtue of being decrees became law of the Church. Thus, it most certainly - in more ways than one, affected both faith and morals.
If you have some evidence, show it.
SD
No, I don't think so. I believe we're at the same place theologically, but the language can be a hang-up. I posted about this in more detail yesterday, but basically I believe that any reverence and respect we show Mary is a direct consequence of her choice to say "yes" to God and the consequences of this action, and has nothing to do with any intrinsic property of her being. This is why the Orthodox call her "first among the saints."
But I do think that NC's in their fervant devotion to the Trinity as the only possible Godhead, and their fear of Mary being presented as a kind of Goddess, have gone too far the other direction and run great risks by trying to portray Mary as "just another woman" and denying her rightful place as mother of God. The truth is between these two extremes. Mary is fully and completely mortal, at her origin in her being no different from you or I. But the impact of her free choice to become the vehicle of the Incarnation was monumental, and effected the whole of creation - and her in an especially powerful way due to her proximity to the event.
She is not now, never was, and never will be a Goddess or co-equal with the Trinity. But the power and grace given by God to a mortal fully and completely redeemed by God is awesome, and we believe that Mary is the epitome of this gift.
It's not that they don't believe in grace, it's just that they never need it.
Oh Lord, it's hard to be hum-ble, when you're perfect in e-ver-y way! Sing it with me.
When the cat's away, the mice will play. Are y'all proud of yourselves?
SD
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. I've never really had a problem with people calling Mary the mother of God. She gave birth to Jesus, thats makes her his mother although it doesn't make her God.
This is why the Lord said his church is invisible - it is of spirit - not of flesh. It cannot be seen with earthly eyes.
Oh please, give me the Scripture verse where Jesus says His Church is invisible. I'd love to see it.
SD
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.