Posted on 01/05/2010 9:46:47 PM PST by the_conscience
I just witnessed a couple of Orthodox posters get kicked off a "Catholic Caucus" thread. I thought, despite their differences, they had a mutual understanding that each sect was considered "Catholic". Are not the Orthodox considered Catholic? Why do the Romanists get to monopolize the term "Catholic"?
I consider myself to be Catholic being a part of the universal church of Christ. Why should one sect be able to use a universal concept to identify themselves in a caucus thread while other Christian denominations need to use specific qualifiers to identify themselves in a caucus thread?
Wrong. Colossians 1:15 - Giving thanks unto the Father, which hath made us meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light: Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son: In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins: Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:
The image of God, NOT God Himself.
No. That’s more Vatican concocted mythology layered on the basic facts of a rather special case of surrogate motherhood.
It’s brazenly incorrect, cheeky, power grubbing absurdity in it’s conotations and implications.
Trinitarians do not deny the basic facts.
We insist that the label is inappropriate.
Grossly and horrendously inappropriate in it’s connotations and implications.
It’s like a terrible to the max case of name dropping.
The relationship was real. The connotations and implications are grossly inappropriate.
There’s certainly nothing wrong with my imagination vis a vis God’s sovereignity.
Nevertheless, no sale. No how. No way. Not a shred of a sale.
God’s act of humbling Himself to take on the form of man . . . was . . . and remains . . .
GOD’S ACT.
Mary was a servant, a tool, a vessel. Period.
"We insist that the label is inappropriate."
Hmmm, I may have found something that unites everyone, except for me. The trinity.
I agree with you that mother of God is totally inappropriate; however, if one believes in the trinity, there is no getting around it.
If Jesus is God, then Mary would be the mother of God.
That's what I don't understand. If people who believe in the trinity, that all three are just One, then one would surmise that Mary is God's mother.
I do believe that God, His Son Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit are "One", in the same sense that husband and wife are "one"... Matthew 19:4-6.... And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh? Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.
My uncle is Pentecostal Holiness. I dislike arguments about the Trinity a lot.
Pentecostal’s don’t believe in the trinity? Sorry, but I have no idea what all these different groups believe and what they don’t.
I know what some religions believe (I think), but I must confess ignorance on all the different denominations and their beliefs.
One relatively small chunk of Pentecostals. . . . broke away from the Assemblies of God way back when over it.
As usual, had nothing to do with theology at the time—was ego, arrogance junk, imho—as usual in such splits. The theology was cobbled together as justification for the power mongering split.
“A sovereignty so great that it rules in weakness”
You have understood.
Deo gratias.
Very happy Gerald Flurry succeeded.
“I deny the cheeky label of MOTHER OF GOD to a mere mortal.”
The label “Mother of God” would seem to imply that Mary existed before the Son of God existed. Mary did not exist in any form whatsoever before the Son of God was the Son of God.
“Unto us a son child is born, unto us a son is GIVEN.” Two natures in one Person. Not two persons, but two natures in one Person. God, NOR the Son of God came into being as a result of the Holy Ghost coming upon and overshadowing the virgin. The Son pre-existed from eternity in the bosom of the Father. Mary did not pre-exist; the human womb could not produce the eteranl Son.
I don’t recall the specific etiology of all those groups. I know that Pentecostal Holiness sprang from the A of G.
Blessings,
That is:
“Unto us a CHILD is born, unto us a SON is given.”
It’s the middle of the night where I am and my eyes are playing tricks on me.
Denied! Phillipians 2:6 - Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:
Being in THE FORM OF....
Jesus is NOT God, but the Son of God.....Mark 16:19 - So then after the Lord had spoken unto them, he was received up into heaven, and sat on the right hand of God.
You are making an assumption that they can not be separated...You are trying to use man's logic and man's wisdom in trying to understand the issue...
The entire thing was 'supernatural' and you're trying to put a human twist on it to elevate Mary to the Mother of God...
You are starting at the end and trying to work backwards...You need to start at the beginning...
In the beginning, God....
God did not have a Mother...God STILL does not have a Mother...
Now, if you want to try to work that out with your human mind from that premise, good luck...But that's the way it is...
Let's take you for example...You were born of your Mother...Each of us (whether you believe it or not) has a body, a soul and a spirit...Is your Mother the Mother of your soul and your spirit???
It was necessary for Christ to have a human mother so he could be fully God and fully man.
Yes.
Then He would have known that the angels He created were going to rebel, He would have known He was going to cast Satan to the earth, He would have known that Satan would tempt Adam and eve..
Yes.
If this was outside His will He could have changed the nature or not made the creations.
Correct. Yet He didn't.
Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure: (Isa 46:10)
Correct. Yet, what is His pleasure? Do we have any words of Jesus?
God “works ALL things after the counsel of his will” (Ephesians 1:11).
I guess not. You don't even have anything that indicates what His Will is.
God created man for HIS glory, to show His attributes.. without the fall we never would have known the holiness and mercy and grace and wrath of God. All things from angels to the smallest ant were created for His glory
This is why I sometimes despair that Calvinists have completely departed Christianity.
Matthew 22:34 19 When the Pharisees heard that he had silenced the Sadducees, they gathered together, 35 and one of them [a scholar of the law] 20 tested him by asking, 36 "Teacher, 21 which commandment in the law is the greatest?" 37 He said to him, 22 "You shall love the Lord, your God, with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind. 38 This is the greatest and the first commandment. 39 The second is like it: 23 You shall love your neighbor as yourself.
Man's purpose is to love God, his neighbour, and to imitate Christ. That is what God wishes for us. God's glory does not depend on creating and then crushing ants under His heel for His Reformed pleasure.
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.