Replies

You write:I never brought up the issue of the Lord correcting anyone.

You said (with emphasis added, of course) in post 921

But even in that passage, the Lord corrects the woman (the only time the Lord corrects any woman in the Gospels) and states that blessed are those who hear the word of God and keep it (Lk.11:28).

Then you said (I cehcked it was you or someone using your 'handle') in the post to which this is a reply:

I never brought up the issue of the Lord correcting anyone.

You conjectured that I was putting up a straw man when I denied that we claim that Mary is the firstborn of Creation. You said then

I do not know what Protestant made such a claim, but it sounds like you are putting up a straw man argument.

So I showed you where it had been alleged by a Protestant that we make that claim.

That's enough. I have nothing further to say to you. Have a blessed evening, but please excuse me from any further discussion.

[You write: I never brought up the issue of the Lord correcting anyone. You said (with emphasis added, of course) in post 921]

But even in that passage, the Lord corrects the woman (the only time the Lord corrects any woman in the Gospels) and states that blessed are those who hear the word of God and keep it (Lk.11:28). Then you said (I cehcked it was you or someone using your 'handle') in the post to which this is a reply: I never brought up the issue of the Lord correcting anyone.

You really do have a problem with reading don't you!.

Note the words, I never brought up the issue of the woman being corrected, I didn't say that I didn't mention it.

But that wasn't the issue, the issue was that the Lord pointed to His words.

So, you were making an issue out of something that I wasn't making an issue of.

You conjectured that I was putting up a straw man when I denied that we claim that Mary is the firstborn of Creation. You said then I do not know what Protestant made such a claim, but it sounds like you are putting up a straw man argument. So I showed you where it had been alleged by a Protestant that we make that claim.

And once again, when one actually reads what was said, it is clear that Mary being the first born was not the point that Silverlings was making.

Silverlings was dealing with Christ as intercessor, and that the Roman Catholics have replaced him with Mary as such and thereby replacing Him in effect as 'the firstborn of creation'.

The emphasis was on the role of Christ as intercession as could be clearly seen by the context of the sentence.

That's enough. I have nothing further to say to you. Have a blessed evening, but please excuse me from any further discussion.

Well, it will give you time to read some Aquinas and find out how the male transmits the sin nature.

That may even help your reading comphrension ability as well.

In fact, here is exactly what I said, after you brought up that verse, not me.

[ But even in that passage, the Lord corrects the woman (the only time the Lord corrects any woman in the Gospels) and states that blessed are those who hear the word of God and keep it (Lk.11:28).]

So, I was only responding to what the verse said after you brought it up and my emphasis was on the blessing to those who hear the word, not on the correction of the woman per se.

Here is the entire context of that exchange, before I mention the verse.

So in the case of the woman who calls out "Blessed the womb that bore you and the breasts that have you suck," (from memory), I don't know what YOU see, But I see someone who is implicitly distancing herself from the love and holiness (and blessedness -- a word the pronunciation of which some Protestants seem unwilling to reveal) which Jesus offers to all of us in Him.

[ I didn't use that passage, I used Mk.3:34-35, where Christ said all those 'who do the will of the Father, the same is my brother, my sister and my mother'. ]

So, it was you who brought up that verse, not I and I only responded to what you were saying.

Just want anyone who is lurking to know exactly what the truth is.

Mary is no one's High Priest, and no one is saying she hasn't been made perfect now. But she is not the One for whom all things were created, the Firstborn of every creature, and yet this is what Catholic theology claims.

The point that Silverlings is making is that the Roman Catholic Church is giving Mary the role of Christ, who is the firstborn of every creation.

Silverlings was not saying that the Roman Catholics were claiming that Mary was the First Born of all creation, but that was the implict effect of making her the 'queen of heaven' and assuming the role of Christ as intercessor.

So, my original statement stands, and you are simply swinging at straw man