Posted on 08/15/2016 11:30:02 AM PDT by NRx
**I have no idea**...
was supposed to say:
I have no idea of the actual physical make up of the Lord’s glorified body.
This windows 10 (that we woke up one morning and found installed) has been aggravating.
You originally asked if there is something to be LOST by ‘arguing’ about the different terms.
Indeed I did; because you mentioned arguing. I wanted to know if there were a flipside to it as well.
|
To: rwa265
I recognize that you have a problem with the term and realize there is nothing to be gained by arguing about it.
Is there something to be LOST by 'arguing' about it? 182 posted on 8/19/2016 4:21:00 PM by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...) |
1. What would you Catholics LOSE by using the phrase Mother of Jesus instead of Mother of GOD.
2. What would we Prots GAIN by using the phrase Mother of GOD instead of Mother of Jesus.
Are you now gonna work backward from here and try to PROVE that Mary is then the mother of GOD?
Is the Christ ALL there is of GOD?
On your last sentence!
John 16:7
For if I do not go away, the Advocate will not come to you, but if I go, I will send him to you.
Just like Clark Kent and Superman are never seen together...
Which "part" Elsie, which "part"?
Perhaps the ANOTHER that Jesus mentioned.
John 16:6-8
…6 Instead, your hearts are filled with sorrow because I have told you these things. 7 But I tell you the truth, it is for your benefit that I am going away. Unless I go away, the Advocate will not come to you; but if I go, I will send Him to you. 8 And when He comes, He will convict the world in regard to sin and righteousness and judgment:
Maybe the "... let US create man in OUR image..."
Are you now gonna work backward from here and try to PROVE that Mary is then the mother of GOD?
No, I am not going to try to prove anything. We can neither prove nor disprove heavenly things.
When Christians call Mary the mother of God, it is with the understanding that she is the mother of Jesus, who is our Lord, God, and Savior. It is only in this sense that Mary is called the mother of God. Christians who call Mary the mother of Jesus also understand that Jesus is our Lord, God, and Savior.
Please keep in mind that my statement that “there is nothing to be gained by arguing about it” was not directed to you. There are situations where one realizes that, no matter how hard you try to move a discussion forward, you are going to receive the same repeated responses, and nothing more. Do you know what I mean? It is best to disengage from such a discussion. At least, for me it is.
With regard to you question about what Catholics would lose by not saying mother of God, well, it ain’t going to happen. They’ve been saying it for centuries and they’re not going to stop saying it now.
As to what “Prots” would gain by saying mother of God, Well they ain’t going to start saying it. It would probably give them a serious case of heartburn.
What we need to do is come to an understanding that we both mean the same thing; that Mary is the mother of Jesus who is our Lord, God, and Savior.
John Calvin warned against that, but even he acknowledged that Christ is the eternal God.
Is the Christ ALL there is of GOD?
I’m not sure what Calvin meant; this is what he wrote:
She [Elizabeth] calls Mary the mother of her Lord This denotes a unity of person in the two natures of Christ; as if she had said, that he who was begotten a mortal man in the womb of Mary is, at the same time, the eternal God. For we must bear in mind, that she does not speak like an ordinary woman at her own suggestion, but merely utters what was dictated by the Holy Spirit. This name Lord strictly belongs to the Son of God “manifested in the flesh,” (1 Timothy 3:16,) who has received from the Father all power, and has been appointed the highest ruler of heaven and earth, that by his agency God may govern all things. Still, he is in a peculiar manner the Lord of believers, who yield willingly and cheerfully to his authority; for it is only of “his body” that he is “the head,” (Ephesians 1:22, 23.) And so Paul says, “though there be lords many, yet to us,” that is, to the servants of faith, “there is one Lord,” (1 Corinthians 8:5, 6.) By mentioning the sudden movement of the babe which she carried in her womb, (ver. 44,) as heightening that divine favor of which she is speaking, she unquestionably intended to affirm that she felt something supernatural and divine.
(Harmony of the Synoptic Gospels, comment under Luke 1:43; Calvini Opera, ibid., vol. 45, 35)
I forgot to include:
Trinitarian teaching also regards the separate and distinct, ‘God the Son’, as the Word. That pretty much puts the Father in an almost mute condition. With trinity logic, ‘God the Son’ should also be ‘God the Word’, right?
Yet, the Son of God declared that the Father in him was the source of all his divinely inspired words.
We’ve never had a mac, but we are seriously looking at switching.
And any non-Christians listening would be wondering WHY the Catholics call her something their Holy Book never does.
So, bottom line is that you have no answers to the two questions I asked.
AHhhh...
If Rome had this attitude about the stuff that is in the Book it assembled!
Ingenious how Apple saw; real early in the game; that if folks were 'introduced' to their product in school; when they were older they'd stick with them.
Proverbs 22:6
Train up a child in the way he should go, And when he is old he will not depart from it.
Hitler noticed the same thing...
So have our Gov't schools.
God does not have parts Elsie, I can’t believe you’re doubling down on this.
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.