Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Neverending Story (The Christian Chronicles)
Associated Press ^ | 3/24/01

Posted on 03/30/2002 7:53:37 PM PST by malakhi

The Neverending Story
An ongoing debate on Scripture, Tradition, History and Interpretation.


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

Previous Thread


TOPICS: General Discusssion
KEYWORDS: catholiclist; michaeldobbs
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 51,281-51,30051,301-51,32051,321-51,340 ... 65,521-65,537 next last
To: SoothingDave; Invincibly Ignorant
The question is still unanswered how someone who was aware of her Immaculate Conception would logically know that she was to give birth without a father.

Assuming that she knew that she had been immaculately conceived (an interesting question in itself), wouldn't it be logical for her to wonder why?

51,301 posted on 05/02/2003 12:53:16 PM PDT by malakhi (Sola Torah, baby!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51296 | View Replies]

To: malakhi
Assuming that she knew that she had been immaculately conceived (an interesting question in itself), wouldn't it be logical for her to wonder why?

Certainly. But to assume that she would deduce the right answer herself is not shown. In fact it is contra-indicated by, among other things, her questioning the angel at the Annunciation. If she had had it all figured out in advance, when the angel came to tell her she would conceive miraculously, her only response to the angel appearing would be along the lines of "You're finally here!"

How we are to deduce from Joseph's reaction that he was aware or unaware of Mary's perpetual virginity is lost on me. Can you make anythign of it?

SD

51,302 posted on 05/02/2003 12:57:24 PM PDT by SoothingDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51301 | View Replies]

To: SoothingDave
How we are to deduce from Joseph's reaction that he was aware or unaware of Mary's perpetual virginity is lost on me. Can you make anythign of it?

I think the line of reasoning was that, if he knew that she had taken a vow of perpetual virginity, then any pregnancy must be virginal and via divine action. So he wouldn't have been upset or surprised or wanting to put her away.

51,303 posted on 05/02/2003 1:02:18 PM PDT by malakhi (Sola Torah, baby!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51302 | View Replies]

To: malakhi
I suspect that lots of women through the ages have taken vows of perpetual virginity but have been discovered to be with child. Absent a visit from an angel, it would be reasonable to suspect each of having violated her vow rather than having given birth to God.
51,304 posted on 05/02/2003 1:09:32 PM PDT by Mr. Lucky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51303 | View Replies]

To: malakhi
I think the line of reasoning was that, if he knew that she had taken a vow of perpetual virginity, then any pregnancy must be virginal and via divine action. So he wouldn't have been upset or surprised or wanting to put her away.

Thank you for the lucidity. I don't see how this is any different than the other scenario. He would "believe" her and not have the utterly human reaction that he had been cheated on, if he knew she had taken a vow of perpetual virginity. But not is she had merely taken the "vow" to be virginal until their wedding night?

She still was supposed to be a virgin at the time it happened. He still questioned her chastity. The duration of her committment to virginity doesn't seem to be a factor, to me.

It's somewhat ironic that we acknowledge Joseph doubted Mary and did not understand the plan of the Lord. The others seem to want to have us make Joseph "more perfect" than we regard him as.

SD

SD

51,305 posted on 05/02/2003 1:10:17 PM PDT by SoothingDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51303 | View Replies]

To: SoothingDave
"Defying any psychological diagnosis" does not have to mean anything, more than "Defying scientific explanation" means we simply lack the tools or ability to deal with everything in our world.

Agreed, but these cases were particular in that way and, in other ways, as well, which defined a pattern that Dr. Peck felt he was seeing.

I can send you, through freepmail, a bit of the text which talks about what Dr. Peck felt he was seeing. Are you up for it ?

Sounds interesting. I would be remiss, however, if I didn't note that it sounds exactly like a psychological diagnosis.

Well, ... what would you expect ?

Wow. Truly, wow. Tell me more about these parents? What caused them to be so deformed?

Well, ... actually there isn't much more to tell. Dr. Peck did schedule another interview with them where he attempted to subtly suggest to them that they could benefit from counseling (like the counseling Bobby was then receiving), but they would have no part of it. They maintained that they didn't need counseling and that they didn't believe in it, anyway. That was the last intercourse Dr. Peck had with Bobby's parents.

He reported that, once Bobby was out of his parents' home, he gradually came out of his depression, and last that he heard, was doing fairly well.

51,306 posted on 05/02/2003 1:14:12 PM PDT by Quester
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51299 | View Replies]

To: Quester
I can send you, through freepmail, a bit of the text which talks about what Dr. Peck felt he was seeing. Are you up for it ?

Sure. Though if it's in another easy format I'll send you my real email address.

Well, ... actually there isn't much more to tell.

Well, the parents are where the story is at. I'm not interested in the victims, like Bobby. His mental problems are obviously the result of his surroundings. We can't expect him to have a well-developed conscience or anything.

What made the parents that way is the real story.

SD

51,307 posted on 05/02/2003 1:19:08 PM PDT by SoothingDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51306 | View Replies]

To: SoothingDave
I don't see how this is any different than the other scenario. He would "believe" her and not have the utterly human reaction that he had been cheated on, if he knew she had taken a vow of perpetual virginity. But not is she had merely taken the "vow" to be virginal until their wedding night?

I don't see the difference either. But then, IMO this is all academic, because I don't think there was a virgin birth anyway.

51,308 posted on 05/02/2003 1:22:47 PM PDT by malakhi (Sola Torah, baby!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51305 | View Replies]

To: malakhi
I don't see the difference either. But then, IMO this is all academic, because I don't think there was a virgin birth anyway.

All understood. But you are lucid, so it's a pleasure to hash out ideas with ya.

SD

51,309 posted on 05/02/2003 1:27:09 PM PDT by SoothingDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51308 | View Replies]

To: SoothingDave; malakhi
Marriages without the expectation of procreation, or even carnal knowledge, were quite common even in the United States prior to the advent of pervasive social welfare.

The last Union Civil War widow died on January 19, 2003, even though she was born 38 years after the last bugle's call. Her husband, who died in 1937, was 63 years her senior.

The last Confederate Civil War widow is still alive. she is 98 years old and was married in 1927 to a husband who was 60 years her senior.

51,310 posted on 05/02/2003 1:27:38 PM PDT by Mr. Lucky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51305 | View Replies]

To: SoothingDave
I can send you, through freepmail, a bit of the text which talks about what Dr. Peck felt he was seeing. Are you up for it ?

Sure. Though if it's in another easy format I'll send you my real email address.


I can send it either way. It's a WORD document.

51,311 posted on 05/02/2003 1:30:59 PM PDT by Quester
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51307 | View Replies]

To: Quester
Send it to soothingdave@yahoo.com

Thanks.

SD

51,312 posted on 05/02/2003 1:32:29 PM PDT by SoothingDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51311 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Lucky
Yeah and Anna Nicole married that really old guy, too. :-)

SD

51,313 posted on 05/02/2003 1:34:45 PM PDT by SoothingDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51310 | View Replies]

To: SoothingDave
I'm sure that wasn't for sex. Brains, yeah, that's it. He married her for her brains.
51,314 posted on 05/02/2003 1:36:24 PM PDT by Mr. Lucky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51313 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Lucky; SoothingDave
I'm sure that wasn't for sex. Brains, yeah, that's it. He married her for her brains.

Is there any reason to suppose the examples you cited were any different in that regard?

51,315 posted on 05/02/2003 1:44:25 PM PDT by newgeezer (fundamentalist, regarding the Constitution AND the Holy Bible)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51314 | View Replies]

To: newgeezer
Yes.
51,316 posted on 05/02/2003 1:46:35 PM PDT by Mr. Lucky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51315 | View Replies]

To: SoothingDave
File sent. Enjoy.

51,317 posted on 05/02/2003 1:47:25 PM PDT by Quester
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51312 | View Replies]

To: newgeezer
Is there any reason to suppose the examples you cited were any different in that regard?

Yes. It helps if you can imagine life without a welfare state. A life where arranged marriages were arranged for various reasons, and often included a fair amount of haggling.

Then, hard as it may be, imagine a life in a society that is not completely sexualised, as out is.

SD

51,318 posted on 05/02/2003 1:48:28 PM PDT by SoothingDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51315 | View Replies]

To: SoothingDave; Mr. Lucky
Thanks to one of you for the lucid answer. ;-)

Oh, and if you really believe our society is completely sexualized, you're dreaming. Thirty years from now, they'll laugh at today's seemingly prudish, Puritan ethics.

51,319 posted on 05/02/2003 1:55:43 PM PDT by newgeezer (Admit it; Amendment XIX is very much to blame.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51318 | View Replies]

To: newgeezer
Oh, and if you really believe our society is completely sexualized, you're dreaming. Thirty years from now, they'll laugh at today's seemingly prudish, Puritan ethics.

When you're right, you're right. I left, at least an "as" out of that sentence. As in "as completely sexualised."

SD

51,320 posted on 05/02/2003 1:59:44 PM PDT by SoothingDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51319 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 51,281-51,30051,301-51,32051,321-51,340 ... 65,521-65,537 next last

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.

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