Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: bonfire

The immaculate conception may have been a policy accepted to answer rationalistic questions prior to grasping the rationalsim behind DNA and genetics.

Today, a rational argument may be presented that the old sin nature or natural man is propagated via the male chromosome provided in sperm, whereas the female, when fertilized via procreation conceives a child that also is dichotomous, still requiring a regenerate spirit before it may have eternal or everlasting life.

Likewise, with the virgin birth, Jesus Christ was conceived by the Holy Spirit, perfect in body, soul, and spirit. Something not possible unless conceived by the Holy Spirit.

Another point might be that RC tends to label Mary as the Mother of the Church as well as Mother of God. They do not take the view that she created God, but rather by her obedience to God by faith she became the mother of Christ Jesus. I agree with this perspective.

I find it more consistent to view man after regeneration of the spirit to be trichotomous in body, soul, and spirit. That regeneration of the spirit being purely the work of the Holy Spirit, of God,..not of any man.

The RC seems to leave the door open on this note to help explain some language used such as mother, brother, and cousins, in Christ in several different places in Scripture.

I have been able to glean more faith and belief in advanced doctrine by interpretting many of those passages more literally than spiritualizing them. However, there may be other advances in doctrine by following the RC studies on these word usages and deeper significance.


45 posted on 01/08/2006 9:47:07 PM PST by Cvengr (<;^))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies ]


To: Cvengr; Larry Lucido

"The immaculate conception may have been a policy accepted to answer rationalistic questions prior to grasping the rationalsim behind DNA and genetics."

Well, and there you have it. A "policy". It's making God something less than perfect and AWEsome. She HAD to be sinless so that Jesus would not have her sinful nature passed down to him?? Catholics will readily believe a statue can cry blood but not that God could send his Son to earth thru a sinful human? Or a woman that would bear other children? Believing Mary was without sin is blasphemy. Nothing less. Even writing it makes me cringe. :)

Night.


47 posted on 01/08/2006 10:02:09 PM PST by bonfire
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson