Do you agree with this statement?

[Fireinfolding]

Do you believe that Mary's Son is God?

Lets do it this way, which verse of scripture do you believe I will deny?

None, try all of them with the divinity of Christ who I acknowledged as creator a million times on these boards, the problem is the confession which Denies Jesus is the Christ, theres an anti Christ spirit that hates the Son and the Christ and that acknowledgment

Its demonstrated here, its why I do this to let it be seen

I just link the scriptures in relation to the Godhead differently than you and yet without ever denying a scripture or the Son of God, or his divinity.

But I get bored with the inquisitions, feel free to search those, nothing I have said is private but I will not play your games, thats all they are.

 

[patricius79]

OK, fine... I haven't figured out how to post on a profile page yet, and you know how I hate pm protocols, but this is on topic, so I will quote a little, ahem:

"One support of the celebrate system has not been considered yet - the Virgin Mary. Modern popes tell priests to think of themselves as virgins consecrated to the Virgin.The study of the priesthood mentioned earlier - the one American bishops commissioned, and then canceled when they saw where it was going - found this trait in seminarians: " Mother dominance, or a prevalence of dominant unconscious mother image (an idealized view of women)." It is often said that Maryenhances the dignity of women. But for mysogenists an idealized mother is both safe in herself and an alternative to lesser women. The Virgin isrrepeatedly useful to prevent the ordination of women

Are are saying that women should be ordained, and that connecting Christ's dignity with that of His Mother gets in the way of this?

Also, you seem to be talking about human dignity. So do you believe that humans have free will, and that Mary freely agreed to become God's Mother?

 

[patricius79]

Lets do it this way, which verse of scripture do you believe I will deny?

None, try all of them with the divinity of Christ who I acknowledged as creator a million times on these boards, the problem is the confession which Denies Jesus is the Christ, theres an anti Christ spirit that hates the Son and the Christ and that acknowledgment

Its demonstrated here, its why I do this to let it be seen

I just link the scriptures in relation to the Godhead differently than you and yet without ever denying a scripture or the Son of God, or his divinity.

But I get bored with the inquisitions, feel free to search those, nothing I have said is private but I will not play your games, thats all they are.

I asked if you if Mary's Son is God. How is that playing games?

Also, do you have a low view of virginity?

 

[bbbbbbb]

Not at all. It would be like crediting the tap for filling the tub when it was actually the water that filled the tub and God could've used rain or a bucket.
The reason it is important to know he is not bypassing the Son, because he IS bypassing the Son.
If you can embrace doublespeak, you are ready for catholicism.

Few truer words were ever written.

 

[bbbbbbb]

I asked if you if Mary's Son is God. How is that playing games?

Also, do you have a low view of virginity?

Is there a particular reason that you consider sexual intercourse within the bounds of holy matrimony to be somehow sinful and less spiritual than a completely frigid marriage?

 

[Job8]

Yes or No?

Let's put Mother Church aside for the moment. It is entirely possible that God could have chosen another virgin of the lineage of David had Mary failed to accept her assignment.

 

[Rick Otto]

I asked if you if Mary's Son is God. How is that playing games?

Also, do you have a low view of virginity?

It is playing games because you shift goal posts and redefinitions, exploiting the ambiguity in language for the sake of contention.

 

[Fireinfolding]

I asked if you if Mary's Son is God? How is that playing games?

Also, do you have a low view of virginity?

It is playing games because you shift goal posts and redefinitions, exploiting the ambiguity in language for the sake of contention.

You can articulate things so spot on at times, I really covet that

 

[Panevino]

Is there a particular reason that you consider sexual intercourse within the bounds of holy matrimony to be somehow sinful and less spiritual than a completely frigid marriage?

This ignores context in this case of a unique relationship with conception/overshadowing by the 3rd person of the Trinity

 

[MrMoe]

If Mary is called mother of God, I'm guessing Joseph is called father of God.

 

[Panevino]

If Mary is called mother of God, I'm guessing Joseph is called father of God.

Yes with caveat of foster or legal father.
Foster father is used in Catholic prayers.

 

[Panevino]

It's important /critical to know that Patricius is not bypassing the son by saying through Mary.
It would be like saying a tap is sufficient to fill a bath without the water. He is just acknowledging a key (though subordinate)role she played that is undeniable. It's just that Catholics have confidence to say it without fearing that it negates the actual source of salvation. Because that's not what is intended/taught.(regardless if it may be misinterpreted by some , which is a confidence that underlies most controversial Catholic doctrine/dogma(i.e. Mother of god for example)

Not at all. It would be like crediting the tap for filling the tub when it was actually the water that filled the tub and God could've used rain or a bucket.
The reason it is important to know he is not bypassing the Son, because he IS bypassing the Son.
If you can embrace doublespeak, you are ready for catholicism.

Hi Rick
Mary is actually the one who participated however (as such the alternate forms of rain/ bucket are in a real sense not relevant regardless that they would of been entirely possible).

The discussion is crucially important
However your conclusion above is respectfully not accurate, because Catholics don't teach that you can bypass the son, there is no other way to reconcile with the Father.

A Catholic would not be Catholic if they thought they could.(even under doctrine of invincible ignorance)

At the same time we don't fear acknowledging/ delving into the beauty of Mary's amazing and completely unique role as his mother.

 

[patricius79]

It is playing games because you shift goal posts and redefinitions, exploiting the ambiguity in language for the sake of contention.

How so?

Also, what are the limitations on how much God can exalt a creature, such as His Mother, who conceived Him by the Holy Spirit?

 

[patricius79]

You can articulate things so spot on at times, I really covet that

You seem to agree with Rick that I "shift goal posts and redefinitions, exploiting the ambiguity in language for the sake of contention."

Would you be able to explain how I do that?

Also, do you have a low view of virginity?

 

[patricius79]

Is there a particular reason that you consider sexual intercourse within the bounds of holy matrimony to be somehow sinfull

The One Church--whose definitive authority all Christians accept by accepting the N.T. Canon-- teaches that sexual intercourse within a normal marriage is very holy.

The Virgin Mary conceived Jesus, our God, in her womb by a union with the Holy Spirit. Do you think that that is a unique reality and situation?

 

[Fireinfolding]

You seem to agree with Rick that I "shift goal posts and redefinitions, exploiting the ambiguity in language for the sake of contention."

Would you be able to explain how I do that?

Also, do you have a low view of virginity?

No to both

 

[Rick Otto]

You can articulate things so spot on at times, I really covet that

I paid a price for it.
Thanks.

 

[Aelred of Rievaulx]

An interesting story here, Aelred, one that you might want to study is the fact Eve once had a strong rival. Mediaeval Christianity, striving to fuse the two contradictory creation accounts into one, came up with he idea that Adam actually had a first wife. Why? If these two accounts are to be fused into one, there is a problem in accounting for some to the personnel here. There are two women that have to be accounted for. The woman in Gen. 1 and then Eve in Gen. 2. Hence, the myth of Lilith. She was Adam's first wife and the woman referred to in Gen. 1. She was aggressive, liked to ride on top of Adam during sex. Adam didn't like this and God didn't either, since woman should be submissive and stay underneath. Hence, God gave Adam a second, better wife, Eve. Now, Lilith ran off and became a witch that goes after children, so that many a crib had "God deliver us from Lilith" on it.

I generally like reading into popular Medieval religion, particularly the apocalyptic notions of Joachim de Fiore, but this sexism just makes me sad. One can't always find inspiration in popular piety, I guess.

PS, I almost missed this post, if you reply to me without posting the reply directly to me or tagging me then I can't see it.

 

[Rick Otto]

No to both

The reason it is hard to explain is because it would be me describing something they are cognitively out of phase with. Truth produces a resonant harmony. If you are indoctrinated with fear, you can't feel truth when it presents itself. It is felt physically, but it is a sensation that begins in the spirit. Joy is the word that comes closest, but it doesn't have to be ecstatic - it can be subtle. But if you have fear guarding your heart, fear is what you will feel. The greater the truth, the greater the fear (in personal terms - we all have our own fears).
Some we outgrow and overcome. Some we are never burdened with.
What any church or religion for that matter, teaches officially, is only an official teaching. Everybody knows in their heart, that what we do as persons speaks louder than what we do as officials. Officiality becomes the infrastructure for doublespeak. Titles become oxymorons or outright lies.
The birth being of a virgin is miracle enough one would think.
My view of virginity is venue appropriate, not subject to official approval. It is neither "high" nor "low". Those terms are a semantic trap in this context. They are vague enough to offer redefinition and goal shifting readily.

 

[Fireinfolding]

The reason it is hard to explain is because it would be me describing something they are cognitively out of phase with. Truth produces a resonant harmony. If you are indoctrinated with fear, you can't feel truth when it presents itself. It is felt physically, but it is a sensation that begins in the spirit. Joy is the word that comes closest, but it doesn't have to be ecstatic - it can be subtle. But if you have fear guarding your heart, fear is what you will feel. The greater the truth, the greater the fear (in personal terms - we all have our own fears).
Some we outgrow and overcome. Some we are never burdened with.
What any church or religion for that matter, teaches officially, is only an official teaching. Everybody knows in their heart, that what we do as persons speaks louder than what we do as officials. Officiality becomes the infrastructure for doublespeak. Titles become oxymorons or outright lies.
The birth being of a virgin is miracle enough one would think.
My view of virginity is venue appropriate, not subject to official approval. It is neither "high" nor "low". Those terms are a semantic trap in this context. They are vague enough to offer redefinition and goal shifting readily.

Hey, I like that "Officiality becomes the infastructure for doublespeak"

Okay, great, so I fell into answering semantical clap trap lol

I guess your right, I mean I really dont have a "low view" of virginity but again in regards to Mary's age (even I never had a sex drive that young to view being a virgin as some great feat to be one). I just dont think of it beyond God's promise and the miracle of our Christ's birth (which is more my focus). But even before then I dont understand the big deal (in and of itself) because Mary (if I consider it) being a virgin at her age... which was what? 12 years old? or 14 years old some others say? I dont know, but even I was a virgin (as an unbeliever) having no such pure virginal aspirations and was a virgin up until around 17 (I didnt quite make it to the day) but the month.

It really wasn't like it was extremely difficult to be a virgin for me at Mary's own age. I had no such struggle at that age. Although I went through a longer "Eww its a boy" stage then my closest peers, but after that wore off and I didnt find them "Ewwy" anymore I commited fornication with the worst of them and lost the right to the title "Virgin me". But I honestly dont get all the fuss given that particular age, its like it would almost be out of the norm if she were not a virgin, espeically back then.

Its neither a low view of Mary or virginity itself

The feeling is somewhat comparable with the thought of glorying in the virginity of a 5 year old. I wouldn't (of myself) ever think to do that because that is pretty much the accepted norm for a child that age, and you just dont think about it. So while everyone around you is throwing a party with a million balloons over it you just cant get all that excited about it. And then when you read the apostles you feel very normal seeing they weren't doing so either, something happened after them (it just got weird).