Evidence for God from Science

And debating with ES and Byblos shows how believers can disagree with each other on certain issues, even strongly disagree, yet at the end of the day, we can still call each other Brothers in Christ.

God will straighten us all out, in the next life. And I can guarantee two things: 1) That there are correct understandings and interpretations of all Scripture and theology; 2) But NO one person or denomination is going to have it all perfectly correct - else we'd all have the mind of God. So, we ALL have to be very careful of denominations with long traditions - or even less lengthy ones, because human beings, when they organize together, particularly in regards to those at the top of a denomination, like to put their stamp on what they have determined as the definitive position/interpretation on various theological issues that the Bible COULD or MIGHT support, but that it wasn't ever meant to. And so, unless the Bible is very clear on an issue, the danger is that the wrongful sensibilities of key people that are founders of a Christian denomination can mix wrongful human ideas and interpretations into their theological beliefs. And, further, denominations typically have key things they favor theologically - rightfully or wrongfully - and then morph these things into a SYSTEM of how to look at it. And to the people making these mistakes, they are often certain their beliefs are correct and that they are trying to honor God. But whether their intentions are good or bad, whenever Scripture is not the measure of determining proper doctrine, then the opinions of man begin to become considered as if the are of the Lord Himself. And this is VERY dangerous. It leads to bad doctrine and practices. And to object to a certain tenant of a denomination's teaching - even if it is alien to or only a creative understanding of Scripture - a person's non acceptance of such will be used as a litmus test of orthodoxy - but not per the Bible, but per what the denomination teaches about the Bible - which can be two very different things.

Philip wrote:God will straighten us all out, in the next life.

That is a vagary without which we can now do as the Day of the Lord has come, the "next life" is already here.

rickd wrote:
Not a valid comparison. The Doctrine of the Trinity is an explanation for the God of the bible. "Mother of God" is not a valid description of Mary. God doesn't have a mother nor father. Mother of our Lord is the proper term used in scripture. I hope you can see the difference between "Mother of God", and "Mother of our Lord".

i hope you can see, imo Jesus is God, My Lord, My Savior, My Prince of Peace, my ...on and on, but i want you to understand, it's just not that important a composite of my faith. IMO, She lays claim to all his titles as "The Mother of" ... she can lay claim to it because when God changed the rules and allowed himself to be human, everything changed. God is no longer just a Father in heaven, he is now the author of salvific life here on earth though his son. who had to be born human for the eventual and tragic sacrifice to be meaningful. And to be born human requires a human mother. That hypostatic, manGod union was birthed simultaneously ... she is the Mother of God in a purely earthly, human way. and also, IMO, that Ark of the New Covenant had to be pure because i cannot imagine the God of the universe, already bowing down, lowering Himself for humanity, knowing just how much he hates sin, could or woud ever allow himself to bath or wallow in the original sin of "The Woman", sin in all it's impurity, which caused all the trouble in the first place.

Mother of God implies something more than her being the mother of Christ's humanity.

i guess rick ... but only if you allow it. the rules were changed when He became human. the eternal God needed a place to secure His place in the world for us and our salvation and he chose from among all, Mary.

And you wonder why people think Catholics place Mary in a higher place than scripture does?

not really, i'm reminded often enough, brother.

10 hour day yesterday with the SA, cooking and preparing for today's street event. (gave the daughter an hour golf lesson... ) Today is also packed with church (St. Johns) goings on for the 13th of May Our Lady of Fatima. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hyIpE1_qIFM.
from 6-9 this evening a person very familiar with Fatima will talk for an hour, then Holy Mass, then a Holy Hour of Adoration for and with Jesus. I so cherish the fullness of my faith and how well and often i get to partake.

i won't be back to check out your response, if you care to, until after the week end.

edit: i'yam the worsttypist in al tha wurld ...

Flirtin' With The Pastor
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XcrCQk54F48

EssentialSacrifice wrote: ...i cannot imagine the God of the universe, already bowing down, lowering Himself for humanity, knowing just how much he hates sin, could or woud ever allow himself to bath or wallow in the original sin of "The Woman", sin in all it's impurity...

Like a man who is too proud to get dirty, any God who is too proud to humble Himself to the upmost is limited, and by definition not God.

God was born a man, out of a sinner's womb, and died one of the most excruciating deaths ever devised by man, all so He could give us eternal life with him for free, only asking that we believe in Him.

Ultimately the issue us with your disbelief, not God's humility.

sc wrote:
Like a man who is too proud to get dirty, any God who is too proud to humble Himself to the upmost is limited, and by definition not God.

you bet, cause God is just like man ... ... you don't think He got his hands dirty ? you think he's too proud ? your pretty sure he didn't humble himself to become us ... your version of christianity is different than mine by a long shot.

Ultimately the issue us with your disbelief, not God's humility.

you don't have a clue about my beliefs, let's just agree to disagree and leave each other alone ...
that definately works for me ...

Hey ES,

Storyteller started a new thread here. We've been discussing this subject, if you want to join the party.

ES..

I think what SoCal is saying that if God could not "lower" Himself to borne of a woman who is a sinner, He cannot be God as it says He cannot do something.
So God being who He is could be borne of a sinner.

Storyteller wrote:ES..

I think what SoCal is saying that if God could not "lower" Himself to borne of a woman who is a sinner, He cannot be God as it says He cannot do something.
So God being who He is could be borne of a sinner.

Storyteller gets it.

Bottom line ES is that the Bible tells us what we need to know, and we are told in it, "not to think beyond what is written" (1 Corinthians 4:6), and the doctrines of Mary that Rome teaches go FAR beyond what was written.

take a look at this. a very small sampling of verse, if you think just because God is capable, and he has to work to your likings, not his own ... and you need bible verses to help you see this ...

http://www.journal33.org/godworld/html/godhates.htm

it is, imo, ridiculous to think God would give His tacit approval of/to sin by allowing Himself to be a part of it. why would He spend so much time and verse on explaining what and why He hates sin but is then ok to be born of it, again, tacitly approving the sinful nature by which he so quickly and uncerimoniously dumped A&E out of the garden just to save the world from that same sin, by being a part of it ? by immersing himself in it ? instead of dying for it, for us, for our sins. .... no, not imo and i think it will be difficult to find, in bible verses that bear this opinion of yours out. find me in the bible where God says he's ok with sin. This story of yours is no less unbiblical than mine, but yours has God steeped in sin and mine keeps Him as pure as the driven snow ... as it should be, forever and always imo.

your thoughts are yours socal, i'm just not in agreemement. i cannot hope for Christ in sin to save me from my own.

Are you saying because God is God, He couldn't have been borne to a sinful woman? That Mary was sinless because she bore God, or did God choose her because she was sinless?

Not sure if ive ecplained thatwell...

Am working through this myself..

Some thoughts..

Is it possible to hate something you do not know?
God hates sin.

Is it possible He knows sin through Mary? If only original sin?

How can Gid know sin, how we feel if He doesnt somehow, experience it?

story:
Are you saying because God is God, He couldn't have been borne to a sinful woman? That Mary was sinless because she bore God, or did God choose her because she was sinless?

Are you saying because God is God, He couldn't have been borne to a sinful woman? ... yes

That Mary was sinless because she bore God,

... no, Mary was sinless because God provided it with her Immaculate Conception. She was literally born without original sin and was so full of God's grace she was incapable of sinning, any more than anyone else "full of grace" could.

God choose her because she was sinless?

Mary couldn't be sinless without the Father will being involved. the reasons for Mary being chosen are pretty much unclear. She must have had an inordinate love for her Father, something that garnered His attention and that He recognized and loved, and so, perhaps {rewarded?}, (a pretty darn painful reward) certainly less painful than her son's, her, with being Theotokis.

Let me ponder on that a while.

Mary being sinless is neither necessary nor biblical.

If God could keep Mary sinless, as Catholicism teaches, why couldn't God keep Jesus sinless in Mary's womb?