[arcura]

Tj3,
No matter how you try to twist it, JoeT777 answered your question.
I also believe that Jesus Christ, my Lord, God the son, was conceived in Mary's womb overshadowed by the Holy Spirit.
Well over one billion people believe that correctly.
If you do not that is your business and fault not mine.
Peace and kindness,
Fred (arcura)

[Galveston1]

Am I to understand that Catholics see no difference between God The Father and God the Son? You keep quoting that scripture which says "son of God" and then equating it to "God", saying that "God" was conceived by Mary, making her the "mother of God"?

While I am here there is something else that applies here (and many other places), and that is this; is the Bible the Word of God or not? If it is the Word of God, then NO ONE has any right to add to, subtract from, or supercede it. Logic tells me you cannot say it is the Word of God and also say chruch tradition or pronouncement of a Pope is just as, or more valid than the Bible. Which do you choose?

[cogs]

Not, God was living in Him. God was Him.



God doesn't need the power of god to do His work. I don't know if you're catching on or not. But, Christ was all man, all God.

JoeT

Hi... I'm sure jesus, as a baby, didn't levitate his pacifier to his mouth. But still the ancient god was working and living. God was
Working through flesh. He did this through the holy spirit. If I have
This correctly, you want me to accept that jesus somehow ruled the
Universe, even while here in the flesh on earth. Then why did he keep
Talking about his father, and why did he have yet to ascend to him? Not
To mention asking the father for the holy spirit to send to us, so that
We could be one as they are one. Which brings me to the point that we
Are able to become one with god, just as jesus is one with god, through
The holy spirit. Are we gods then? If you want to call us that, but we
Certainly don't rule the universe or heaven.

[JoeT777]

Am I to understand that Catholics see no difference between God The Father and God the Son? You keep quoting that scripture which says "son of God" and then equating it to "God", saying that "God" was conceived by Mary, making her the "mother of God"?

Yes, in the New Testament the title “the Son of God” is used to express the Divinity of Jesus Christ (the Messiah). (e.g. Luke 1:32, 35; John 1:49) In Matthew, chapter 16, verse 15, Peter declares that Jesus is “the son of the living God.”

Regarding the birth of Jesus: "I believe in Jesus Christ, His only Son, our Lord. He was conceived by the power of the Holy Spirit and born of the Virgin Mary." I’m using the formula of the Apostle’s Creed so that I don’t misrepresent the Church’s position.

While I am here there is something else that applies here (and many other places), and that is this; is the Bible the Word of God or not?

Catholic would agree that the Scriptures are the inspired word of God written by men and as such are sacred. The Church holds that Scripture and Apostolic Tradition must be in harmony to be taught by the Magisterium of the Church for those things necessary for salvation.

If it is the Word of God, then NO ONE has any right to add to, subtract from, or supersede it.

No one in the Church has added to Scripture. No one has subtracted anything from Scriputre. The Church has maintain the Scripture through the ages. As I understand the way Catholic theology works, is that Scripture must bear out Tradition; as well as Tradition must bear out Scripture. Catholics today hold the same faith as those taught by the original 12 Apostles.

Logic tells me you cannot say it is the Word of God and also say church tradition or pronouncement of a Pope is just as, or more valid than the Bible. Which do you choose?

You’re absolutely right. The Pope can’t stand up and say – “believe this way” or you will not receive salvation. That is, without teaching through Scripture in harmony with Tradition. He’s prevented by the Holy Spirit. In this way we are assured by Christ’s promise to protect the Church from error. Furthermore, the Church teaches that the Holy Spirit protects the Pope from making any such error. But, this does not prohibit the Pope from establishing certain disciplines, e.g. ban on married priests. Or, from invoking his right to “bind or loosen,” e.g. the right of Rome to issue indulgences. (Which by the way, contrary to Protestant belief, can’t be sold)

I’ve explained these issues using my words and understanding of the RCC. I can, if you would like, discuss them more rigorously as they apply to Church doctrine; but I would suggest you do it under a different thread

JoeT

[cogs]

Joet777, we both believe in god, and jesus as the son of god. Mary
Was jesus' mother on earth. Mary was not born before god, and so cannot
Be the mother of god, as god is also spirit and timeless. We both want to follow god's will in our lives. God should be the focus, as we were created for his good pleasure. God has a plan for mankind, which involves his holy spirit within us. We are to become sons of god. How does this happen? Do catholics have a way to get there?

[arcura]

Cogs,
The bible says that Mary conceived and give birth to Jesus Christ.
It also says, Matthew 1:23. "Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and bear a Son, and they shall call His name Immanuel,'' which is translated, "God with us.''
Because the bible says that Mary is the mother of God I believe it.
Jesus other name is Immanuel or "God with us".
That is perfectly clear.
Peace and kindness,
Fred

[cogs]

arcura, thanks for your continued patience. I don't think we're on opposing sides of this, just a different perspective. If we were to look at jesus on earth, what would we see before us? A being that looks and acts just like us, a man. We would have seen his birth, infancy, childhood, teens, and then manhood. He would have appeared to us just as we are. The bible even says that he wasn't anything special, as far as appearance. The people up to that time had not seen god. Maybe god was not even see-able. So when we would have called jesus 'god with us', we surely would have been talking about something other than his humanity, else we would have called him 'average joe'. His divinity was only apparent from his miracles, and words. So something internal was active in jesus. I believe this was god. God is spirit. He can act through anything, just as jesus said he could have raised up stones to praise him. So when you say that mary birthed jesus, we agree. Where my perspective changes, is that the internal thing that made jesus different from us, was only available to him in the way that he did miracles and remained sinless. Not only that, but jesus' authority was given to him, to pay for sins as a sacrifice. We weren't accepted as a sacrifice. Mary, as well, could not be accepted as that sacrifice. She did not have that authority. And there is no record of her miracles. Yes, she birthed jesus, but his authority and power did not encompass her. So I can say that with jesus, god is with us. But with mary, god is not with us.

[JoeT777]

joet777, we both believe in god, and jesus as the son of god. mary
was jesus' mother on earth. mary was not born before god,

I never made the statement that Mary “Mary was born before God,” never implied it.

and so cannot be the mother of god,

Oh, but she was. She was the selfless handmaiden of God, blessed among women, full of grace; the “Mother of my Lord.” (Cf. Luke 1) What other person in the New Testament is honored this way?

God was infused into Christ at the moment of conception, within the womb of Mary, Christ, who was man with God infused. Thus after the proper time, Christ was born of Mary as according to “Behold thou shalt conceive in thy womb and shalt bring forth a son: and thou shalt call his name Jesus. 32 He shall be great and shall be called the Son of the Most High. And the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of David his father: and he shall reign in the house of Jacob for ever. 33 And of his kingdom there shall be no end.” (Luke 1: 31-33)

Mary birthed Christ. Just as we call the woman that gave birth to us, we call Mary the Mother of Christ; conceived in her womb she brought forth a son, the Messiah.

god is also spirit and timeless.

Agreed

we both want to follow god's will in our lives. god should be the focus, as we were created for his good pleasure.

God is the focus. Agreed, however as your father wants you to respect and honor your Mother, so does Christ wish for us to honor and respect His Mother; "behold thy mother."

god has a plan for mankind, which involves his holy spirit within us. we are to become sons of god. how does this happen? do catholics have a way to get there?

Yes, with fear and trembling do we work out our salvation, through faith and good works, harmoniously with God’s will, rejoicing in the sufferings for His sake, for our salvation; (Cf. Phil 2:12)

JoeT

[JoeT777]

catholics have a way to get there?

Sure, but that's an odd question. Who said we didn't? Didn't I address this above?

JoeT

[arcura]

cogs,
You are right about Mary, she is not divine, but her son was and is.
Mary gave birth to the God/Man Jesus who was/is fully God and fully a human man.
He has the attributes of both God and Man.
Don't forget that God appeared as a man to Abraham, but Jesus was/is a man and God.
With God all things are possible.
Peace and kindness,
Fred (arcura)

[arcura]

JoeT777
Right, we Catholics have a way to get there.
The Eucharist is one of them.
Having a good strong working faith is another.
All though the grace and mercy of God.
Peace and kindness,
Fred

[cogs]

I never made the statement that Mary “Mary was born before God,” never implied it.

I know, I just say this to explain myself.

Oh, but she was. She was the selfless handmaiden of God, blessed among women, full of grace; the “Mother of my Lord.” (Cf. Luke 1)

I believe she was.

God is the focus. Agreed, however as your father wants you to respect and honor your Mother, so does Christ wish for us to honor and respect His Mother; "behold thy mother."

I agree jesus respects his mother. The bible says to honor your father and mother.

Yes, with fear and trembling do we work out our salvation, through faith and good works, harmoniously with God’s will, rejoicing in the sufferings for His sake, for our salvation; (Cf. Phil 2:12)
JoeT

Yes, this is the work we should be doing, god's will, and enduring the sufferings we encounter for his sake [that he died] for our salvation. (brackets mine) the trouble, is finding out what is his will.

[JoeT777]

god was working through flesh.

Respectfully, the difference between us is that I would have stated that “God was flesh” in Christ. I view the statement above as a form of Arianism (link).


JoeT

[cogs]

Here's where the confusion comes: if mary birthed god, then god would have been conceived in her womb. Since the bible tells us that in the beginning god created the earth, and everything else, then mary was not conceived. So logic follows that, that which was not conceived, conceived that which conceived that which was not conceived.

[JoeT777]

here's where the confusion comes: if mary birthed god, then god would have been conceived in her womb.

No confusion on my part. Mary birthed God is precisely what happened, but he was “conceived by the power of the Holy Spirit” (Cf. Luke 1) The fact that God resided in the womb of Mary is precisely why I suggested that Mary’s womb was like the Holy of Holies in Moses’ Tabernacle (Cf. Ex 32?-40). To suggest that God resided in an unclean temple simply would have been unimaginable in Christ's time and is as unimaginable as Moses failing to keep the Tabernacle ritually clean. Thus, we conclude that Mary was immaculately conceived (without sin) by some miraculous miracle of God. Catholics do believe in miracles.

Again: I believe in Jesus Christ, His only Son, our Lord. He was conceived by the power of the Holy Spirit and born of the Virgin Mary." This was carefully worded for a reason at the dawn of Christendom.

since the bible tells us that in the beginning god created the earth, and everything else, then mary was not conceived. so logic follows that, that which was not conceived, conceived that which conceived that which was not conceived.

Yes, God created the earth and the heavens above, and it was good. But that knowledge doesn’t come to the logic that Jesus, the man, was separate from Christ, which was God.

JoeT

[cogs]

Then we agree... mary was not the mother of god. You could just as easily say that mary was the daughter of god because she was the daughter of eve, who god created. So father, mother, sister, brother, if it feels nice, don't think twice, shower the people you love with love. (james taylor)

[JoeT777]

then we agree... mary was not the mother of god. you could just as easily say that mary was the daughter of god because she was the daughter of eve, who god created. so father, mother, sister, brother, if it feels nice, don't think twice, shower the people you love with love. (james taylor)

Are you quoting James Taylor the singer-songwriter? Never heard of him. But Mary was Mother of God.

JoeT

[arcura]

cogs,
God is eternal and infinite, true.
God chose His Word to be born as a human man from a human woman named Mary.
As the bible says the word is God and was born of Mary and named Jesus, a human name.
So it was, so it is, so it will always be.
Peace and kindness,
Fred

[cogs]

I agree arcura. Joet777, yes, the singer. Did you say that right, that you do not agree that mary was mother of god? And by the way, I believe that jesus was somehow god, I just don't understand completely how god worked himself into flesh. Doesn't matter though, because jesus had the authority to atone for the world's sins, as a sinless sacrifice.

[JoeT777]

i agree arcura. joet777, yes, the singer. did you say that right, that you do not agree that mary was mother of god? and btw, i believe that jesus was somehow god, i just don't understand completely how god worked himself into flesh. doesn't matter though, because jesus had the authority to atone for the world's sins, as a sinless sacrifice.

Yes I did say it backwards! I fixed it. I can agree that Jesus atoned for the sins of the world. (I didn't say that backwards).

JoeT