Posted on 03/30/2002 7:53:37 PM PST by malakhi
Statesmen may plan and speculate for liberty, but it is religion and morality alone which can establish the principles upon which freedom can securely stand. The only foundation of a free constitution is pure virtue. - John Adams |
There's a "keep your roasaries off my ovaries" joke in there somewhere.
SD
Now that I think about it, this would also have the effect of removing any possibility of Jesus literally being from the line of David. If Joseph is not his bio-dad, and Mary is not his bio-mom, then how can he be said to have any claim to the throne of David?
There shall come forth a shoot from the stump of Jesse, and a branch shall grow out of his roots. (Isaiah 11:1)
Instead of a branch growing out of the roots, we have a whole brand new branch, attached, apparently, to nothing at all.
This begins to sound like a variety of Docetism.
Valentinus the Egyptian attempted to accommodate his system still more closely to Christian doctrine by admitting not merely the reality of the Saviour's body but even a seeming birth, saying that the Saviour's body passed through Mary as through a channel (hos dia solenos) though he took nothing from her, but had a body from above. (Catholic Encyclopedia, Docetism)
We'll go to my mother-in-law's. She always plops slices of kielbasa in the gingerale/cherry juice/pineapple juice mixture in the bottom of the roasting pan. It's like gloriously candied hunks of pork fat. Yummy yummy!
SD
Why? Did you make 'em wear a beanie? ;o)
Ugh!
I guess the answer is that "whatever He was" He was adopted by Joseph. This begins to sound like a variety of Docetism.
There is nothing new under the sun.
SD
Beef fat?
Well, the bunny lived through the night and my wife has gotten some special milk for him. The cat even sat and watched my wife feed him. Maybe they'll play together when he grows up.
SD
See what I posted about Melchisedec(sp) from Hebrews and his not having mother, father, beginning of days nor end of life.
Yes, I saw that. Did you see my response? You cannot assume that, just because scripture doesn't explicitly list a person's parentage or vital statistics, they therefore have no human parents and/or are immortal.
Case in point. Nowhere in the gospels do you find mention of Pontius Pilate's parents. Can I therefore assume that he had no mother or father?
And by this we may be sure that we know him, if we keep his commandments.
He who says "I know him" but disobeys his commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in him (1 John 2:3-4)
Hmmm...
that is, in Christ God was reconciling the world to himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and entrusting to us the message of reconciliation. (2 Corinthians 5:19)
Ya but I'm not under the law. :-)
The bible says Melchisdec is like Jesus in this way.
That's what I'm gonna tell the next officer that pulls me over for speeding. :-)
Lets use your logic on Matthew 1:25.
RSV but knew her not until she had borne a son; and he called his name Jesus.
The same logic proves Joseph "knew her not" until she had born a son.
Try again.
The NAB is an approved Catholic Bible isn't it?
NAB He had no relations with her until she bore a son, (12) and he named him Jesus.
Note: (12) Until she bore a son: the evangelist is concerned to emphasize that Joseph was not responsible for the conception of Jesus. The Greek word translated "until" does not imply normal marital conduct after Jesus' birth, nor does it exclude it.
The next day my cat left a headless chipmunk on the porch. What was he telling me?
He was making you an offer you couldn't refuse. Was your cat from Sicily by any chance?
Wait! It does say so? Oh, nevermind.
And this is to be taken literally? Melchizedek literally had no father, no mother, nor beginning of days, nor end of life? This isn't just a way of saying that this information is not revealed in Genesis?
If this passage is literally true, then Melchizedek is alive today. Where is he?
You know better than that. I use it to show that the use of the word "till" does not have to mean anything about what happens after. It is merely a statement of truth up to the moment of hte "till."
You know this.
The woman no more had children after she died than Mary had to have relations after Jesus was born. "Till" does not have to mean that. It can or it can not.
The Greek word translated "until" does not imply normal marital conduct after Jesus' birth, nor does it exclude it.
Yes, that is exactly right, which is why the footnote is there. Thanks for quoting it. The use of "till" does not either imply or exclude. We must look to other evidence, as this is not conclusive.
You can certainly read it the Protestant way if you want to. But it is not cut-and-dried that that is what it means.
SD
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.