Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: Dr. Eckleburg; kosta50
How can you understand the Gospel if you don't believe Paul was sent by God to deliver the Good News?

Where did I say that, or more to the point, where did I give the appearance of saying that?

Misquote, conflate, beat a strawman to death. I understand how that type of argument is done... I just don't understand WHY.

Jesus Christ would exist without St. Paul, St. Paul, you, me, everyone and everything else, would not exist if not for Jesus Christ. I (and you I suppose) would exist without St. Paul having existed. I exist independently of you, you exist independently of me. When I close my eyes you don't cease to exist, much as I might hope that would be the case on occasion. We (and St. Paul) are not contingent beings, neither are we necessary beings.

Now... where it gets really interesting is whether or not Mary is a necessary being. Christ received His human nature from her, if another woman had been chosen He would have had a different human nature. Hilariously enough the only non-Catholic around here who would have even the faintest idea what I'm talking about and who would be able to have a meaningful discussion about it is an agnostic. Which goes to show how much better he expresses/deals with/explains/demonstrates the faith he rejects than you express/deal with/explain/demonstrate (all that to avoid using the word "understands" and thus be accused of mind reading... this is getting old) the faith you profess to hold.

7,836 posted on 09/30/2010 11:12:07 AM PDT by Legatus (Keep calm and carry on)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7824 | View Replies ]


To: Legatus; RnMomof7
Now... where it gets really interesting is whether or not Mary is a necessary being

It all goes back to the myriad of Christological beliefs of the early Church. Those who treated Christ as a mere man who was later "adopted" (Adoptionism), either at his baptism ("this day I have begotten you") or after his resurrection, depending which biblical author you read, Mary is completely unnecessary because the ontological change took place afterwords.

Those who treated Christ as a lesser God and an errands boy of the Father, seen in a myriad of Christological heresies such as Arianism, Modalism, etc., would also make Mary and incidental, if not random accident of no particular significance or necessity because his ontological humanity is a mere mask.

Since so many modern-day Protestant offshoots express the same Chrisotlogical beliefs as those early heresies, is there any wonder that Mary is trivialized and marginalized?

7,844 posted on 09/30/2010 12:05:34 PM PDT by kosta50 (God is tired of repenting -- Jeremiah 15:6, KJV)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7836 | View Replies ]

To: Legatus; RnMomof7; 1000 silverlings; metmom; OLD REGGIE; blue-duncan; boatbums; Gamecock; ...
Now... where it gets really interesting is whether or not Mary is a necessary being. Christ received His human nature from her, if another woman had been chosen He would have had a different human nature.

RCs just keep feeding us punch lines.

Was Mary's "human nature" any different than yours or mine or any person since Adam?

Read the Bible. God chose a virgin from the house of David to fulfill prophecy. He did not choose Mary because her "human nature" was different from any other human being -- fallen, corrupted by sin, doubting, fearful and egocentric.

If Mary's "human nature" were not the same as yours and mine, she would not have required a supernatural messenger from God to convince her of the truth.

7,855 posted on 09/30/2010 12:54:36 PM PDT by Dr. Eckleburg ("I don't think they want my respect; I think they want my submission." - Flemming Rose)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7836 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson