Posted on 01/28/2011 9:32:34 AM PST by marshmallow
Most Catholics have never critically examined the doctrines of Roman Catholicism. They didn’t join the Church because they found its doctrines to be true, but, as they will tell you themselves, they are Catholic because they were born Catholic.
The reason that they remain in the Church is because that is where they feel most comfortable. Most Catholics will say they are Catholic because in the Church they found the moral framework that they needed for life. It’s a place for their children to form proper values and to learn about God. They like the emphasis in the Church on loving one’s neighbor, right living, and social justice. But doctrine is not important to most Catholics. They didn’t join the Church because of doctrine and they don’t stay in the Church because of doctrine.
Many of the reasons people give for why they are Catholic are just as valid for explaining why they belong to a social club. Unconcerned about doctrine, they pass through life without ever having seriously questioned the veracity of the institution to which they have entrusted their eternal souls.
>> Just turn on any of the prophecy pimps to get the “definitive” answer.<<
I guess I just thought we could have a civil conversation about it without the scoffing. Never mind.
Read this sentence carefully.. He KNEW she would say yes, but gave her the freedom to say no... so if HE KNEW she would say yes..could she have said no?? Could Gods foreknowledge be WRONG?
With God is not foreknowledge predestined future?
God would have come into history to offer our salvation by other means had she not said yes.
But you just said that He KNEW she would say yes..
I just want to note that Marshmallow does not agree that God could have used another woman or method
That was speculation showing that God if He had known she would refuse He would have still acted in history to save us. Even if not by that means.
I can assure you that the faithful Catholics of my acquaintance have indeed examined doctrine quite critically.
She was a decent enough young Jewish woman whom God used to incarnate His Son. She was not a demi-god, nor incorrupt, or immaculately conceived. She was not the object of anyone's worship or adoration. She was a sinner saved by grace whom God used to His end.
If Rome would not force upon us things regarding Mary that cannot be deduced from Scripture, agreement would not be that difficult.
AHHHHH Excellent observation.. her choice was no choice !!!!!
One wonders if she could have said no if God would have removed that sinless birth???
The continued misrepresentation of Catholic doctrine does not put certain posters in a good light. I must assume it is not done intentionally as doing so reflects badly on the posters’ ability to comprehend Catholic doctrine. Which I do not blame anyone in paticular for but one should have the grace to admit their shortcoming and concede it is a subject best left to others.
There is only one Savior and that is Jesus. Such as been Catholic teaching from the very beginning. To claim otherwise is a blatant spin on that teaching.
How would you expect me to have a conversation, civil or otherwise, based on a premise that is fundamentally faulty? “Let's have a civil conversation on the nature of green cheese wrt the moon.” Weren't you really just baiting me? What were you expecting me to say?
Can God save us?
Yes?
Can He save us at anytime of His choosing?
Yes, He is sovereign.
Did God save Mary at the time of His choosing?
Yes.
Was that saving dependent on the merits of Jesus Christ?
Yes?
How can that be if Jesus was not yet Incarnate and certainly had not died on the Cross and had not yet been resurrected?
Because Jesus being God is also eternal and His merits do not have to be limited to our understanding of time. He could apply those merits to His mother even before His incarnation.
Repeat it as much as you like it will still be an assumption based on personal prejudice and not fact.
Would you say that Mary was predestined to be the mother of Christ ?
If we look at the necessary requirements for the Savior to fulfill the OT prophecy, He had to have a specific lineage which He had through Mary and her husband Joseph.. His father by adoption ...The bible says that when the time was right (Gal4:4) He sent His son ..So the timing of Christ's arrival was to coincide with a system of roads and transportation that would allow for the gospel to spread..
So the mother and fathers existence had to coincide with the right political environment
Was all this happenstance?
Actually Mary was never asked..the angel told her what was to come and even named the child ...
I hate to use the term predestined cause there is a lot of baggage attached to it. I will state that from all time God has always known that man would fall and that He would promise them salvation. That being true He also knew how He would save us.
But what God always knew is not what we know at any set time. Adam did not know he would sin before he disobeyd God and yielded to temptation. Mary did not know she would say yes until the angel appeared.
So neither of them had the knowledge they were acting according to God’s sovereign plan. One disobeyed and one obeyed. Both were acting under their own will and own ability to make a free choice. Yet God’s hand was upon both. Is that contradictory? I don’t think so because as I stated before God is outside of time.
I do agree that yes the time of the Incarnation was the right time and for the reasons you state. Roman roads and Roman peace.
Could God have chosen another way of Salvation? Yes, but He did not. Remember the angels who rebelled did so because they could not abide the idea of God humbling Himself to become one of us.
I was commenting on what marshmallow had posted.. If Jesus birth relied completely on Mary being the mother then without her there would be no salvation ..so in effect she was the original savior..
When he wrote that I understood why some catholics want to call her a co redemtrix ...Thus my comment..
Your interpretation does not mesh with Catholic teaching. Mary had a very important role in Salvation history but that does not make her in any way a savior.
RE link to that video you posted about yesterday:
It’s found at post 376 on this thread.
However, I have so many puzzle pieces saying the same kinds of things . . . I don’t have the luxury of dismissing it out of hand.
He cites high level sources with photocopies.
http://amazingdiscoveries.tv/media/123/211-232K/
If you don’t have time to watch it now, I encourage you to copy the link and save it in a safe place ...
This is true. However, this non-rejection didn't result in a doctrinal stance. Confessional Lutherans don't view it as a theological issue for obvious reasons.
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.