Posted on 06/25/2015 1:13:01 PM PDT by RnMomof7
Why not? "For man it is not possible. or God all things are possible."
You might be wondering whether Jesus can bilocate. The answer is: yes. He can not just bilocate, He can omnilocate.
Where'd she get her soft tissues from?
Any mention of stem cells?
(Talk about reductio ad absurdum...)
((((sigh)))))
Was she really flies of his flesh ??? All that XX flesh..
I know, I know, typo...
We're both a little past our peak performance, I think...
I mean, yeah, beinst Adam was XY and Eve was XX, they were different in every cell of their bodies, right?
Unless Eve was a Trans-woman??
Oh man, oh woman, oh she-it, that's what's called fleshly thinking. Exegesis by Meathead.
G'Night now, RnMomof7. Peace to you and to all your household. I'm going to go eat some watermelon.
Yea think /???LOL
Jesus offered to Thomas to place his hand in his side.. where the soldier had stabbed him ... No word that Jesus was bleeding from that side.. does a resurrected body need a pumping heart and blood.. ???
Have a good night..........I have been running a day ahead all day...and was thinking of getting out stuff for church ... terrible not to work... time is irrelevant
Oh you foolish Galatians ...
The present catholic Eucharist is not Christian, and that you persist is more reason to expose the mystery religion that is not Christianity hustled by the Vatican.
“There can be no participation because Jesus is not in heaven being continually offered for our sin.” The satanically inspired modern catholic church will tell you their jesus is here in their blood and flesh eucharist. The catholics cannot learn, apparently. Through the mouth and belly they are taught to believe they receive the Life of Jesus. That’s as pagan as it gets, folks. That is not how the Bible teaches we receive the Life of God in our spirit, the earnest of our inheritance. But catholics are so well duped that they cannot see and will not see because they want to work their way to the throne of God.
Notice how your mystery religion makes subtle changes to dupe the foolish who will not read what the Bible ctually says? And any catholic could fix stupid by reading the actual texts, but apparently they prefer the deception because it is familiar. What a brilliant coup satan has fabricated with Catholicism.
Try to sty close to a seat, you’re spinning so fast it will make you dizzy.
Oh my, any excuse to believe the magic of the mystery religion which is not Christianity.
As always I enjoy our conversations and I wish you the best.
“But she could not be conjugally given to Joseph -— in the full, one-flesh sense -— because she had already been given to God for the exercise of her sexual reproductive capacity.”
She had not been given maritally to God. She never had sex with God. She did reproduce. She was miraculously impregnated. She was married to Joseph and we can assume they had normal sex at some point after her normal pregnancy and normal delivery.
“This is true in general (this also entails an openness to bear children, i.e. we’re talking about honest natural sexual relations, not perverse or contracepted acts) but it does no t require intercourse under any and all circumstances. For instance, if one of the spouses is actively HIV-positive, that would be a just reason to abstain from intercourse; or if the couple had a serious reason to avoid pregnancy (e.g. wife has cancer of the cervix or uterus or some other serious condition.)”
We agree, but we are not aware that Mary had any disease or other serious reason to avoid marital intimacy. We must assume as an obedient believer she obeyed God’s commands.
“I always thought that was wrong, even moreso on her husband’s part than on her’s, because she was diagnosed psychotic but he was supposedly in his right mind. He knew she suffered by pregnancy-triggered psychosis but kept on having intercourse with her regardless.”
I think we agree here. Some people should not have kids and if so, should take steps to not have kids.
“So although there is in marriage an exclusive exchange of conjugal rights (the wife’s conjugal right to her husband, the husband’s conjugal right to his wife) there is not a limitless obligation to have intercourse in marriage.”
Unless there is a reason to prohibit it, obedience requires it.
“As for Mary, she had a serious reason to abstain with Joseph, because it was God who had a conjugal right to her.”
The Scriptures do not say this. It is conjecture. There is no idea in Scripture that Mary had a sexual relationship with God or that God ever had “conjugal rights” to Mary. Not once. Not repeatedly. Not a marriage. She was selected to bear Messiah. She did. She went on with her normal life. Scripture is silent on anything else.
“If Jesus’ parents were Mary and the Holy Spirit, then by simple analogy it follows that Mary (in this particular sense, and this alone) is the “spouse of the Holy Spirit”.”
MDO, this is not only a false analogy, it is more than Scripture ever claims. God simply performed a miracle. He didn’t marry her.
“In any case, in no place does the Scripture authorize bigamy, i.e. according conjugal rights to more than one person. “
In this context, it isn’t bigamy to be married to one human man and have sex and reproduce.
To assume otherwise is to make up things and pretend they are true... for what purpose?
Finally, I guess I will await the presentation of all the evidence you found from before 100 ad to demonstrate that anyone ever believed Mary remained a virgin or had no other kids during the time of the Apostles. I don’t know everything, so if you have it, I’d like to see it. If it doesn’t exist, it makes it very difficult to claim it was “always believed” before 1500 ad.
Best to you.
The one big flaw with MDO's argument about Mary is that Mary was already espoused to marry Joseph when the angel made the announcement.
That, in the Jewish custom of the day, WAS a legal marriage, which did entitle Joseph his conjugal rights.
He was considering DIVORCING her, not a term one uses if one is not in a legal marriage.
Therefore, if one is going to go by the conjugal rights angle, The Holy Spirit would have been impregnating a woman whose conjugal rights were already spoken for, thus making, (and I'm sure the RC's will jump all over this one) the Holy Spirit and Mary both adulterers in having some sort of conjugal relationship with an already legally. married woman.
As for Mary, she had a serious reason to abstain with Joseph, because it was God who had a conjugal right to her.
Wrong. since she was already married to Joseph, legally although not yet consumated, it was JOSEPH who had those conjugal rights. Mary was a MARRIED woman when God told her she would bear Jesus. Joseph had every right to take her as a normal wife after the birth of Jesus with normal expectation of a normal sexual relationship with HIS wife.
Calling Mary the spouse of the Holy Spirit when she was legally married to a man, would make both her and the Holy Spirit adulterers, if the conjugal angel were correct.
There could NOT have been a conjugal relationship between Mary, a human being, and the Holy Spirit, diety.
Careful now, you might expose more of the magic thinking that hallmarks catholicism.
The Catholic presumption that Mary took a perpetual vow of virginity as a young girl presumes she knew enough about sex at an age she should not have, presumes that she knew the future and knew she would bear the Messiah, more than implies that she entered a marriage contract with Joseph under fraudlent terms, with no intention of fulfilling her role as a married woman, and leaves Mary and joseph living together under false pretenses, pretending to live as a husband and wife before the world when they weren’t, making them party to deception and perpetuating it.
Their whole position on trying to rationalize the Mary and Joseph situation is rife with illogic.
metmon
+10
excellent post
If you need a sinless womb; to 'carry' a Sinless man; then there just HAS to be an infinity of them!
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.