Posted on 01/11/2012 7:34:56 PM PST by RnMomof7
Please think about what you ACTUALLY REALLY WROTE, not what you think you wrote.
Jesus the second person of the Trinity was always Divine. At the moment of His conception He received a human nature. The human nature had to be incarnated to an already existing Divine nature since the human nature is finite.
in the bible there is reference to Jesus' birth. There are also references to Him being a child and being raised to honor his mom and dad. One might use logic and assume that He was taught, as a tiny lad, to refer to Mary and Joseph as mother and father.He probably did not refer to them to His friends and buddies as my woman and old man...I'll use common sense to conclude that He referred to them as My mother and father.....My mother said I had to be home before dark....sounds better than My woman said it.
I’ll do the same as Christ did. “It is written”. Jesus promised the apostles would be told the things they needed to remember. They wrote it down.
2 Peter 3:15,16 - The apostle Peter classified Paul's epistles as "Scripture," right along with "other scripture." But "Scripture" is inspired by God and provides to all good works - 2 Timothy 3:16,17.
Only the apostles were in a position to be promised that they would “remember” what they heard and saw. No other people on earth could have been given that promise. If we don’t have it recorded in writing from them it can not be relied on.
Paul was referring only to the OT. Do you honestly think he considered his writing sacred. they were not part of the accepted Canon until the late 300's
It becomes a Jefferson Bible application on top of sola scriptura. You throw out all of what Matthew, Mark, Luke and John wrote except when quoting Jesus.
Causes just a few problems elsewhere..
Where is the term Holy Trinity found in Scripture? Where in Scripture does it say that we should believe only what is written in Scripture? What was “Scripture” in the first century?
See 384
Um. Yes, of course.
So is that the entirety of your reply? Sounds like you’ve acquiesced. Nice.
I don't think that there was a "written word" called the bible for about 400 years after Paul was dead. All early christianity was indeed by word of mouth and tradition. The Catholic Church compiled, edited transcribed, and protected the teachings now found in the printed version. Until the 1400's when Gutenberg provided a method for the average person to possess a bible, only the very elite or royalty or libraries even had a copy because they were expensive hand written versions. Word of mouth and tradition were the only tools available to the early church.
I will not trust my eternal future to “assumptions”.
>>I'll use common sense to conclude<<
That would be carnal “common sense” wouldn’t it? You go right ahead and do as you see fit, it is after all your eternity.
Colossians 2:8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.
So you agree then that Mary was not His mother in the sense that He began when He was conceived within her? Your semantics are turning.
No, I wish to say that the divinity of Jesus was from eternity and didn’t start with Mary.
Then the analogy still holds.
Your daddy parts didn't start with your mother. Is she mother only of your mother parts? Is Mary only mother of the parts that "started with her"?
Here’s my quote: “Only the apostles were in a position to be promised that they would “remember” what they heard and saw. No other people on earth could have been given that promise. If we don’t have it recorded in writing from them it can not be relied on.”
Did the apostles write Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John? If so then didn’t I say I would rely on what they wrote? Why would you then attempt to twist my words by saying I would “throw out all of what Matthew, Mark, Luke and John wrote except when quoting Jesus”? Did they not write other things besides what Jesus said?
Please don’t attempt to twist my words to mean something you would like. And don’t attempt to tell me “what I do”.
It answers the question of where in the bible does it show that any of the saints can be prayed to - those are two examples - they’re dead and they were prayed to.
That wasn’t the discussion I was referring to.
You throw them out when they say Mary is the mother of Jesus.
Nope, your contention was the male designation isn’t until later in the term from conception. My contention is that at conception the Y chromosome is already present which designates the fetus a male.
I don’t understand how that Scriptural passage and/or your question is related to what we (you and I) have been discussing on this thread.
A. Her husbandAnd in the context of the first chapter of Luke where "Lord" had already been used by the writer to refer to the Lord God of Israel before Elizabeth's salutation of Mary and where "Lord" was subsequently used by both Mary and Zechariah to refer to the Lord God of Israel, could the answer to the question above conceivably anything other than C? If so, how, without doing violence to the plain language used by Elizabeth? Or was the writer just a clutz who didn't really think about what he was writing and how it could appear to support the claim made by another gospel writer that the boy would be called Immanuel, meaning "God with us"?
B. King Herod
C. Yahweh, the Lord God of Israel, creator of heaven and earth.
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.