Replies

I'm not saying, when I say God is your secretary, that He is your inferior. I'm saying that you couldn't communicate at all or with anyone whatsoever without His sustaining the act at every level, physical and metaphysical and psychological, and in every other way that it needs support.
Mad Dawg. This argument is silly. I can fully believe in God's sovereign sustainment of humanity without labeling him a "Secretary." And, you know that I do believe in these things so the line of questioning here is fruitless.

I thought it was the Calvinists who were all about the Sovereignty of God, but now you seem to be in position of saying that communication can happen without God's help.
Uh, where did I say this? Nowhere. I live and breathe and have my being in God Almighty. I am saved by His Sovereign will. Do not be mistaken. I am fully aware that I am NOTHING without the direct and sovereign agency of God.

I understand you to say that it is remarkable that communications to Mary would be assisted by the Lord. I'm saying EVERY communication at all times is assisted by the Lord, and no communication would ever happen without him.
No, MadDawg, you are switching the subject is what you are doing. You are trying to take it from a "Communication with the dead [including Mary] is unbiblical" to "God makes communication with Mary possible." You haven't proven the middle step. First, it has to be biblical, which it is not. Second, it has to show up in Scripture as something that we are supposed to do. Considering that Paul was writing to an audience physically living on earth when he said Intercede, I don't believe you have a case that the Saints who have gone to heaven intercede. Third, God has to make it possible that all of those saints can hear, discern, understand all the people that are speaking to them - which is something that you have theorized but have not proven.

If that is not scriptural, then I am not scriptural. But you sound like a deist here - God wound up the communication mechanism and turned it loose? - and I know that's not true, that you're not a Deist.
Yes, you know that is not true. I dont' see anything that I said that would lead you to believe that I have any deistic thoughts either.

So then you make the equivalence that if we say God enables communication with Mary then we are making God Mary's secretary.

And rather than dispute that, I run with it. (Would it be better if I said volunteer secretary, or if you had?)
No, because it still creates a rather odd scenario. We communicate with Mary. Mary can't hear it so Jesus takes the message. Mary gets the message and then tells Jesus what it was. Now, if you had said that God gave Mary omniscience, then he is no longer her secretary. You have other issues, but he isnt' a secretary. Would it be okay or at least pardonable if I characterized the Calvinist view as God as a puppet master controlling everything for his amusement, saving some puppets but throwing others into fire, like a spoiled emperor pulling the wings off of flies, or a Spartan killing a Helot just for the, uh, Helot of it? It wouldn't be okay with ME if I did that.
You can characterize God's Sovereignty as you wish. But be aware, Paul already dealt with the objections in Romans 9 and God Himself did so at the end of the book of Job.

And again, you all think that God is in time and changeable. We don't. He serves. He has always served. That's what Sovereigns do. Tyrants dominate. That's why people hate tyrants and love their good kings. They don't serve out of compulsion, but out of wisdom and love.
Earthly kings are given their authority by the people. They do not necessarily serve either. They do as they wish, sometimes to the benefit of the people sometimes to the detriment. God always works things for the good of His people. This does not mean that He is the people's servant. His actions are that of a benefactor. But it is 100% His will and plan, not ours.

As to the rest, we take seriously the saying: Áãáðçôïé, íõí ôåêíá èåïõ åóìåí, êáé ïõðù åöáíåñùèç ôé åóïìåèá. ïéäáìåí ïôé åáí öáíåñùõç ïìïéïé áèôù åóïìåèá, ïôé ïøïìåèá êáèùó åóôéí. we shall be like Him (I John 3:2) And, come to think of it, "..greater things than these ..." We take the promises very seriously indeed, and rejoice in them.
And, we take seriously the first part of the verse as well...it doth not yet appear what we shall be. We don't know what form our Christ-likeness will be. We don't know that we will be omniscient as He is omniscient. We shouldn't presume what Scripture doesn't tell us.

You are trying to take it from a "Communication with the dead [including Mary] is unbiblical" to "God makes communication with Mary possible." In all seriousness, I was just responding to one thing you said. I am not trying to prove the over all contention. You made the secretary crack. I responded to it. That's all. I didn't claim that my work with that comment proved the whole case. I said nothing about the whole question.

You said something like "That makes Jesus Mary's secretary." I responded. and now you say I am switching the subject. It is if you were saying, NOT only is it unbiblical and preposterous on a thousand other grounds, but it makes Jesus Mary's secretary. And I address everything after the but, and nothing else. I wasn't responding to everything you ever said, or even some other things you ever said. I wasn't saying it was Biblical. I wasn't saying it was free of any other objections. I was responding to one thing and only one thing.

First, it has to be biblical, which it is not. Second, it has to show up in Scripture as something that we are supposed to do.

Sez you. That's your canon of proof, not mine, which is why I wasn't addressing that. I was only addressing your comment about Jesus being Mary's secretary. (And as far as I'm concerned, even by your canon I would sya it has to show up as something we MAY do - or as somethng that is explicitly forbidden -- and then we could argue about the state of the "Departed" since the resurrection.

No, because it still creates a rather odd scenario. We communicate with Mary. Mary can't hear it so Jesus takes the message. Mary gets the message and then tells Jesus what it was.

leaving aside questions about the operation of various persons of the Trinity, that's how I think ALL communication takes place. It wouldn't be exceptional for communication with the saints in heaven to take place that way. It would be normal (stipulating arguendo that such communication takes place at all.)

Now, if you had said that God gave Mary omniscience, then he is no longer her secretary.

Not even then. Mary could never have omniscience "in her own right". If we want to use time language about it, then we would say that IF God gave Mary omniscience, He would maintain it, preserve it, operate it for her at every infinitessimal quantum of time. He is the factotum and the facsemper.

God always works things for the good of His people. This does not mean that He is the people's servant. His actions are that of a benefactor. But it is 100% His will and plan, not ours.

OH. I'm getting it. You're on the "obedience" side of "Servant" I'm on the "service" side. God is not obedient to the people (which God forbid!), He is not their servant to boss around. He is their servant in that He serves them , and commands them to join Him in service to one another. In His perfect self-disclosure He comes among us as one who serves.

We don't know that we will be omniscient as He is omniscient.

Again: I am very open to the concept that there are people, much less saints in heaven and angels, who know more than I do about what's going on and any number of things. I do not think therefore they are omniscient. Saying that Mary can handle a bunch of incoming and outgoing calls is not equivalent to saying she is omniscient an domnipotent. I don't think any RC theologian attributes omniscience to Mary, but I could be wrong. "Like" is not the same as "same" (even in Greek. ) And she could me "pluriscient" and "pluripotent" without being omniscient or omnipotent. "Greater things than these ...."