Could Mary have stopped God?

[NewToLife]

You ignore the actual point of the OP then.

Your denial of free will, seems like the very essence of the OP from my point of view.

 

[Uphill Battle]

Your denial of free will, seems like the very essence of the OP from my point of view.

sure. In your point of view.

The point was "could Mary stop the incarnation of Jesus Christ."

obviously not.

God forknew that Mary was the best choice for carrying Christ. He knew her answer before she ever existed. If Mary had any inclination otherwise, she would not have been chosen. you might be praising Hail Ethel, for all we know.

the point though is, because of God's foreknowledge, there was no way the incarnation was being stopped. God's will was going to be excercised. To suggest that Mary could have stopped it from happening is spurious, and frankly takes away from Gods omnipotence. Some would have us believe that God waited with bated breath to see what Mary would say. Hogwash and poppycock.

And, in my later posts, I asserted that God did not ask permission. I still hold to that. Nowehere does God "ask" Mary to do this. He tells. The fact that she humbled herself before the Lord is incredible, yes, but It wasn't God asking "can I."

THAT was the point of the OP.

 

[NewToLife]

The OP was a loaded question, which is of course a logically fallacious and manipulative way of arguing. As such its hardly surprising that not everyone feels compelled to answer it directly. To allow such manipulation would simply be foolish. Like being stupid enough to answer yes or no to 'have you stopped beating your wife'. The only sensible ways to answer are to question the dubious premise that you do in fact beat your wife if you even have one or note that the question is loaded.

The reason the OP is a loaded question is that you reason that any emphasis placed on Mary's yes is somehow incompatible with a sovereign God. A dubious assumption which you then used to frame your question in a way designed to manipulate others into giving a specific reply that you were looking for.

This fallacy is otherwise known as the fallacy of many questions.

You should probably refrain from terms such as hogwash and poppycock if you are going to indulge in manipulative and fallacious non-arguements.

 

[Uphill Battle]

The OP was a loaded question, which is of course a logically fallacious and manipulative way of arguing. As such its hardly surprising that not everyone feels compelled to answer it directly. To allow such manipulation would simply be foolish. Like being stupid enough to answer yes or no to 'have you stopped beating your wife'. The only sensible way to answer is to question the dubious premise that you do in fact beat your wife if you even have one.

The reason the OP is a loaded question is that you reason that any emphasis placed on Mary's yes is somehow incompatible with a sovereign God. A specious assumption which you then used to frame your question in a way designed to elicit a specific reply that you were looking for.

This fallacy is otherwise known as the fallacy of many questions.

yet you continue to post and post and post.... ???


Given that somebody answered yes, it isn't so loaded a question as you seem to think.

 

[NewToLife]

yet you continue to post and post and post.... ???

Others might be decieved into believing your point is valid if no one points out its fallacious and manipulative nature.

Given that somebody answered yes, it isn't so loaded a question as you seem to think.

More fallacious rubbish, a loaded question is designed to elicit responses useful to the questioner. That you managed to get one is hardly evidence that the question wasnt loaded.

 

[Uphill Battle]

Others might be decieved into believing your point is valid if no one points out its fallacious and manipulative nature.



More fallacious rubbish, a loaded question is designed to elicit responses useful to the questioner. That you managed to get one is hardly evidence that the question wasnt loaded.

ah, that's right, you must "defend" anyone from thinking for themselves, and have an opinion other than your own! The question was valid. Could she or could she not. Some have said she could.

 

[HisBelovedMelody]

Funny, I didn't see the question as loaded at all. It was blunt and to the point. NO Mary could NOT of stopped God's plan.

That is what I noticed about the catholic faith, they can only believe what they are told by the pope or priest...no free thought of their own. Sad kinda..

 

[NewToLife]

ah, that's right, you must "defend" anyone from thinking for themselves, and have an opinion other than your own!

Fallacious playing to the audience and ad hominem.

The question was valid. Could she or could she not. Some have said she could.

The question was loaded, I've already shown you why.

 

[Uphill Battle]

Fallacious playing to the audience and ad hominem.



The question was loaded, I've already shown you why.

you've ASSERTED why.

 

[HisBelovedMelody]

Fallacious playing to the audience and ad hominem.



The question was loaded, I've already shown you why.

you haven't s hown anything except the question made you mad.

 

[NewToLife]

Funny, I didn't see the question as loaded at all. It was blunt and to the point. NO Mary could NOT of stopped God's plan.

If you accept the contested premise you likely wont see it as loaded.

That is what I noticed about the catholic faith, they can only believe what they are told by the pope or priest...no free thought of their own. Sad kinda..

Firstly I'm not Catholic. Secondly I dont really see how you can read my posts and honestly arrive at the idea that I'm simply parroting a priest but I guess it suits you to rationalise thoughtful Catholic and Orthodox posts away in that fashion. That way you are saved the ordeal of actually examining the soundness of the beliefs you have picked up.

 

[NewToLife]

you've ASSERTED why.

See post 63, there is an arguement, an arguement is different from an assertion.

 

[Uphill Battle]

See post 63, there is an arguement, an arguement is different from an assertion.

The reason the OP is a loaded question is that you reason that any emphasis placed on Mary's yes is somehow incompatible with a sovereign God. A dubious assumption which you then used to frame your question in a way designed to manipulate others into giving a specific reply that you were looking for.

you mean that bit?

This question wouldn't have been asked if I had not seen it asserted elswhere that Mary COULD have stopped the incarnation.

When I saw that, I was staggered, to think that anyone thinks that God's plan of salvation hung on the whim of a teenage palestinian, instead of the indomnitable action of God himself.

Loaded? perhaps. Manipulative? not in the slightest. there are some who believe this... and that is very, very sad.

 

[NewToLife]

When I saw that, I was staggered

Not as staggered as i was at the ideas expressed around the crucifixion by you and another in this thread believe me.

 

[Uphill Battle]

Not as staggered as i was at the ideas expressed around the crucifixion by you and another in this thread believe me.

what did I say about the crucifixion?

 

[IamAdopted]

Not as staggered as i was at the ideas expressed around the crucifixion by you and another in this thread believe me.

So you don't believe that God used these men to accomplish His plan? It is all prophecied about in the OT.. Jesus came to die so that we may Live. This was Gods plan.. Do you not know that Jesus layed His life down voluntarily for our sake and sin? Jesus said no one can take my life from me.. I lay it down.. This was Gods plan for redemption.. God used those who hated Him to do this bidding of His plan and they didn't even know that He did this.. Look at Judas Iscariot.. He also was in Gods plan.. how is this so hard to understand?

 

[HisBelovedMelody]

If you accept the contested premise you likely wont see it as loaded.



Firstly I'm not Catholic. Secondly I dont really see how you can read my posts and honestly arrive at the idea that I'm simply parroting a priest but I guess it suits you to rationalise thoughtful Catholic and Orthodox posts away in that fashion. That way you are saved the ordeal of actually examining the soundness of the beliefs you have picked up.

ya know, you should work on your attitude. Pray about it..see if it is pleasing to God, cause your put downs are getting tiresome...and I would appreciate it if you would stop. I do not believe Mary could of stopped anything because God knew what she would say. He could of picked anyone, but obviously there was something about Mary. Give me a break...Uphill is right...a little jewish girl could stop the ultimate plan of God?? Don't think so.

 

[Davidnic]

So out of curiosity if the question were phrased:

Would God have forced Mary against her will to bear and raise Christ?

Are all of the above no's now be yes?

Because if they are not then there is far more to the question than the poll shows and the simple yes/no of it shows nothing.

 

[sunlover1]

So out of curiosity if the question were phrased:

Would God have forced Mary against her will to bear and raise Christ?

Are all of the above no's now be yes?

Because if they are not then there is far more to the question than the poll shows and the simple yes/no of it shows nothing.

Or if Mary had said, "No God, please not me", He could have had Jesus be born
of another woman.

ORRR.
He could have reasoned with her.

She couldn't have stopped God from
sending Jesus though, obviously.

But she didn't say no anyhow.

 

[UberLutheran]

If God's going to do something, then God's going to do something -- and our choice comes down to going along with God's will or receiving a Cosmic Granite Slab on top of the head (metaphorically speaking).

Cosmic Granite Slabs tend to really hurt, and they certainly do get our complete attention -- and then God ends up doing what He wants, anyway.

Better just to do what God wants the first time before the Cosmic Granite Slab.