Posted on 12/05/2010 6:14:57 PM PST by RnMomof7
Evidently you forget
I’m merely copying what I learned from
Rabid Clique RC folks
who initially, originally used such to be personally assaultive to me.
I thought they were great fun and helped loosen the threads up. I still do.
Besides, if folks are too starchy, too self-important, too arrogant to appreciate fitting implications of an image constructively
they are likely too thin-skinned for an open thread.
Thanks.
The question of original sin is the key query. The answer to the question is a matter of theological debate.
I'm sure he will be willing to confirm this, in the interest of being fair.
fd: “I make no representations as to the inaccuracy of interpretations.”
Sure you did....
Here.....
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2637924/posts?page=254#254
and here.....
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2637924/posts?page=299#299
Besides, where we state the RCC is wrong is by comparing the Catechism of the Catholic church with Scripture, not for the most part, comparing the translation of the Bible that the Catholic church uses to other not Catholic endorsed translations.
Really?
INDEED.
I will adopt his asinine style, since it seems acceptable here.
What’s *nom* supposed to mean?
Are you the Mod?
Nobody has argued against Mary's virginity before and during her pregnancy. The disagreement is whether she remained a virgin after giving birth to Jesus.
Also, the stone rolled away from the tomb. One of "the three Marys" saw the open tomb, saw the body was gone, saw Jesus, thought he was a gardener, and asked for Jesus' body.
That needed to be pointed out. Well said.
NOPE
NO one is attacking
THE CHURCH OF JESUS THE CHRIST.
We Proddys attack
the blasphemies, idolatries, heresies
in the
!!!!TRADITIONs!!!! of man bound fossilized edifice of the
1600 year old
Vatican Alice in Wonderland School of Theology and Reality Mangling and all its subunits slavishly heretical in like manner.
Certainly. Consider how the most effective Religion Forum posters deal with antagonism. They don’t meet fire with fire. A soft answer turns away wrath (you’ll find that in Proverbs.)
Using my gifs from my account
is stealing my bandwidth without my permission.
However, sometimes, I feel generous.
Got some sources to back up that fantastically unbelievable claim?
>>The question of original sin is the key query. The answer to the question is a matter of theological debate.<<
383 posts and we get to the crux (and the debatable fact)! Excellent, MortMan.
The underlying argument has a lot to do with Catholic theology. In the same way that a “right to privacy” was derived from the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, so has Mary’s ex-pos-factos clearance of Original Sin been established through hundreds of years of detailed theological scholarship.
This is frustrating to many, since they ask “well then why have Original Sin at all? God can clear from any and all!” But I think that sidesteps the point of Jesus’ arrival. He brought not only the removal of Original Sin but the New Law — we are judged on our acts and thoughts. Only Jesus could carry that most important message and His death was the only way that could be solidifies in the soul of Man.
I am not a super-deep scholar, but have spent a not-inconsiderable time working through and researching these issues.
And I still have to admit my Aramaic is rusty.
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.