Testimony of a Former Irish Priest

BereanBeacon.Org ^ | Richard Peter Bennett

[Mad Dawg]

The only such language that I am aware of (not that that's any guide) is that IC is "fitting." It would be fun to see the Latin, but I'd guess "decens" or "decorus."

But in any event, I don't think that's part of the 'definition' and we certainly affirmed to Incarnation for a long time before the IC was defined. So while SOME may say it's necessary, I wouldn't call that necessity de Fide.

I AM, however, talking through my hat. I'm not up on the conversation. ( I AM, however, down fo' the struggle. )

[Deo volente]

Very good!

The whole question is moot (in my mind, at least) since God knew from eternity that Mary would say “Yes” to His wonderful Plan. He preserved her from original sin according to His own designs because it was supremely fitting for His Son to be born of an immaculate Virgin. That was His Plan.
Who are we to murmur against God and try to second-guess Him? That would be the ultimate in folly.

[Natural Law]

"I believe it is part of the BIBLICAL GREAT DECEPTION of the END TIMES."

Just when I thought there was nothing more you could say to further marginalize yourself........

[D-fendr]

Here:

Jane gave birth to Jack
Jack is human
Mary gave birth to a human.

With your premise:

Jane gave birth to Jack
Jack is human
Mary was born by cesarean section
Mary gave to a human

Jane gave birth to Jack
Jack is human
Mary was not born by cesarean section
Mary gave to a human

---

The third premise does not affect the syllogism, is irrelevant and unnecessary.

[don-o]

The secret woid(s) is(are): "ET’s” on RELIGION

[Quix]

An argument cannot stand, it seems to be thought, if it turns out there is some hidden motive.

NOT AT ALL. I'm a bit perturbed that you'd say that.

THAT'S NOT THE POINT AT ALL.

Those are 2 different issues that just happen to both be evident in the case of the

MISLEADING,
FALSE,
SEDUCTIVE,
MANIPULATIVE
TITLE OF
"MOTHER OF GOD."

Mary was
NOT AT ALL
THE MOTHER OF ALMIGHTY GOD!
That's a simple fact.

REMOTELY IMPLYING SHE WAS,

IT IS GREATLY WORSE--BRAZENLY STATING IT
AS FAR AS
100'S OF MILLIONS OF FOLKS OF
ALL TYPES OF PERSUASIONS AROUND THE WORLD
--INCLUDING UNTHINKING, SIMPLE FOLK, BLIND FAITH TYPES OF
ROMAN CATHOLICS THE WORLD OVER

It not only causes confusion. it increases idolatry and blasphemy.

The Pope and the magicsterical are bright enough to know that. Yet they perpetuate the lie.

THAT'S DREADFUL, NO MATTER HOW ONE SLICES IT.

[Belteshazzar]

xone responded to this, er, suggestion:
“Here is one to think about. What would you say if an alien landed in a UFO on the Washington mall and came out and pronounced that Jesus Christ was actually one of them. Would your pew still be comfortable? How would your church and Pastor handle it.”

With this:
“Before or after we stopped laughing? When Jesus comes again, there won’t be a question about Who He IS. False messiahs from space are false messiahs period. This scenario admittedly isn’t one I have considered, but now forewarned, I still laugh.”

Wonderful response! I’m still laughing as well.

[OLD REGGIE]

#6333 "...it is clear that any further participation on the thread would be a waste of time."

You're wastimg your time.

[presently no screen name]

Even the rocks will cry out..

GIVE UNTO THE LORD THE GLORY DUE HIS NAME! Psalm 29:2

[OLD REGGIE]

#6333 "...it is clear that any further participation on the thread would be a waste of time.

You're wastimg your time.

[the_conscience]

However, if the third premise is stated:

Mary must be immaculate to conceive Jesus

and that premise is false then the conclusion is invalid.

[Quix]

AMEN! AMEN!

[Quix]

Evidently a lot of folks cannot imagine the impact and truth of the Scripture about

a GREAT END TIMES DECEPTION

SO GREAT AND SLICK

THAT WERE IT POSSIBLE, EVEN THE VERY ELECT WOULD BE DECEIVED.

I take that Scripture quite seriously.

Just watching how OThuga gained the White House as chilling as that was . . . will, by comparison, be child’s play to this GREAT DECEPTION coming.

[D-fendr]

You’d have to prove that premise first.

“Mary must be immaculate to conceive Jesus” is a whole nuther syllogism, not necessary in the one in discussion. For example, the EO accept the logic of this syllogism, but consider the Immaculate Conception false or not proven.

[smvoice]

I'm still waiting for someone to tell me if Jesus Christ knew that Mary herself was immaculately conceived. Seems if He did, He could have given her that rightful place of veneration at

1). the wedding at Cana, He didn't exactly called Mary 'Blessed'. "Woman, what have I to do with thee? mine (NOT OUR) hour is not yet come." (John 2:4).

2). And who can forget the 'Blessed" Mary of Luke 11:27,28. "And it came to pass, as he spake these things, a certain woman of the company lifted up her voice, and said unto him, Blessed is the womb that bare thee, and the paps which thou hast sucked." (Luke 11:27)

Here it is. The moment of TRUTH. The moment all Catholicism could rest it's Mary doctrine on.

All He needs to do is confirm the words of the woman of the company....

"Yea RATHER, blessed are they that hear the word of God, and keep it."

......crickets......

There goes the doctrine of Mary...and in its place THE WORD OF GOD...

[presently no screen name]

I believe it is part of the BIBLICAL GREAT DECEPTION of the END TIMES.

YES and it will get worse. On 9/11/01 who would believe in seven years the USA would have an unvetted president named Barack Hussein Obama who said '57 states' and 'my muslim faith' BEFORE the election and his previous 'associates' were known.

DECEPTION HAS INCREASED. I'm sure all who voted for him believed they couldn't be fooled.

[Mad Dawg]

It was the-conscience’s argument that I had sort of held back belief in the IC and thus rendered my argument suspect that I was arguing against.

BUT

Jesus is God the Son of God

Mary is the Mother of Jesus

SO Mary is the Mother of God the Son of God.

Is there a flaw in that argument?

Thomas calls Jesus “My Lord and my God.” Is he misleading folks by not specifying “My Lord and my second person of the Trinity?”

Jesus is God of God, Light of Light, Very God of Very God, begotten of the Father before all worlds. As touching His Godhood he is not less than the Father.

Neither person of the Trinity IS an other person of the Trinity

Each person of the Trinity is God.

Look, once you articulate trinitarianism you’re gonna get modalism. Once you say Jesus is man and God, you’re gonna get Nestorianism, monothelitism, adoptionism, monophysitism.

People will get it wrong. I’m confident that backed to the wall I will come out in error in my Trinitarian or Christological thought. I don’t see how anybody can get it right.

So, I have to commend my erroneous mind to God for Him to enlighten when and how he sees fit. And I have a sneaking suspicion that that commendation matters more to Him than any amount of theological success.

I trust the same for some uneducated and poorly catechized person somewhere. The sooner they say, “Well it’s all too much for me but I love Jesus and I love His mother,” the better for everybody, especially for them.

[metmom]

Funny, I see a lot of side stepping, but no one is answering the question.

I can reword it for a simple *Yes* or *No* answer.

Is the Immaculate Conception a necessary precondition (or prerequisite) for the Incarnation?

[D-fendr]

Here’s the basic theological point: Jesus has two natures inseparably united in one person, that person is one of three Persons in One Godhead. That person is God, the Son in the Holy Trinity.

Mary gave birth, according to Incarnation Theology (and common sense), to a person, not a nature. A person whose two nature cannot and must not be separated in order for the Incarnation and the Holy Trinity to be true.

Any attempt to claim Mary gave birth to a nature or to separate whom Mary gave birth to into two natures is heresy.

I believe this is the theology for orthodox Christians, Trinitarian Christians, and others particularly those saying the Nicene Creed.

One can vary from this theology of course, but they do so at risk of heresy in the eyes of most Christians whose theologians hold the orthodox doctrine of the Trinity and the Incarnation.

[D-fendr]

First, to understand our beliefs on this question, you need to know we don’t see the verses quoted as Jesus dissing or denigrating his mother.

Others may wish to give you more details, but that’s the important basic point.