To: OLD REGGIE; Campion; Iscool; Diego1618; Frank Sheed
There is no clear consensus as to the authenticity of any of the "Ignatius Letters". I would tend to agree with you and obviously they have never been accepted as Canonical. That being said, why did Diego1618 reference them as "proof" that the Blessed Virgin Mary had other children (post #551)?
591 posted on
03/05/2007 9:28:15 AM PST by
wagglebee
("We are ready for the greatest achievements in the history of freedom." -- President Bush, 1/20/05)
To: wagglebee; Campion; Iscool; Diego1618; Frank Sheed
I would tend to agree with you and obviously they have never been accepted as Canonical. That being said, why did Diego1618 reference them as "proof" that the Blessed Virgin Mary had other children (post #551)?
I dunno and I'm certainly not the one to ask. :-)
BTW, I might have used "authentic" rather than your choice of "Canonical".
693 posted on
03/05/2007 1:03:53 PM PST by
OLD REGGIE
(I am most likely a Biblical Unitarian? Let me be perfectly clear. I know nothing.)
To: wagglebee
I would tend to agree with you and obviously they have never been accepted as Canonical. That being said, why did Diego1618 reference them as "proof" that the Blessed Virgin Mary had other children (post #551)?I did not offer them as proof. My exact words are here: There is a good indication here.....that Ignatius thought he was. Offered as food for thought only.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson