Apologetics Zingers

[Bwavenit]

When a “Bible” Christian says: I belong to a Church based on the BIBLE! you answer: “Good for you. I belong to the Church that WROTE the Bible!”

I like It!

 

[johnnycatholic]

The ever-pithy Fulton Sheen once said, “To anyone who thinks Catholics pay too much attention to Mary, remember Christ spent ten times as much of His life with her as with His apostles.”
P.S. I think it is perfectly acceptable to use little witticisms about the faith. People are drawn to popular culture because they find movie characters witty and cool. Why can’t we draw people in with a similar appeal?

 

[rr1213]

Q: Why did the Anglican cross the road?

A: To get to the middle.

 

[mercygate]

Q: Why did the Anglican cross the road?

A: To get to the middle.

 

[rr1213]

I actually thought you might enjoy that when I posted it…

 

[Franciscan]

Q. What would you say is the Pillar and Foundation of Truth?

A. 1 Tim 3:15.

 

[seek]

I posted this the other day in a different thread.
It just kind of caught me. It’s a revision of a
bumper sticker I see on occasion.

  No Mary   No Christ

  Know Mary   Know Christ

 

[Catholic_Dude]

“If the Douay-Rheims was good enough for the apostle Paul, it’s good enough for me.”

Phil P

Hey, you took that from our Fundamentalist friends, If the KJV was good enough for Jesus it is good enough for me!

 

[sandusky]

Fidelis:

I’ve never heard this one refuted:

Jesus is God
+Mary is Jesus’ Mother
=Mary is the Mother of God

Stated as a syllogism, your statement would look like this:Major Premise: Jesus is God
Minor Premise: Mary is the Mother of Jesus
Conclusion: Mary is the Mother of God

The major premise is false, and could be considered heretical; therefore, the conclusion is false, and, it too, could be considered heretical.

 

[calchiquita]

Stated as a syllogism, your statement would look like this:Major Premise: Jesus is God

Minor Premise: Mary is the Mother of Jesus

Conclusion: Mary is the Mother of God
The major premise is false, and could be considered heretical; therefore, the conclusion is false, and, it too, could be considered heretical.

I understand the syllogism - I don’t understand why you believe the major premise to be false.
Or, are you just saying that if someone did not accept the major premise they would use this?

 

[mercygate]

Stated as a syllogism, your statement would look like this:Major Premise: Jesus is GodMinor Premise: Mary is the Mother of JesusConclusion: Mary is the Mother of GodThe major premise is false, and could be considered heretical; therefore, the conclusion is false, and, it too, could be considered heretical.

Yup. I guess you could be considered heretical, since Christianity universally affirms that Jesus, the incarnate second Person of the Trinity is indeed “God” – consubstantial, co-equal, coeternal with the Father: God of God, light of light, true God of true God . . . as stated by the Council of Constantinople.

So to say that “Jesus is God” is a false statement puts you squarely in Camp Heresy.

Man, Sandusky. I’m disappointed. I thought you were a solid Christian Fundamentalist.

Sorry: I don’t have a zinger for “Jesus is not God.” Shucks!

 

[Fidelis]

Wow! I’ve heard a lot of verbal gymnasitics to try and deny the obvious implications of this, but to go to the extreme of denying the total divinity of Christ is – well, EXTREME.

 

[teachccd]

Stated as a syllogism, your statement would look like this:Major Premise: Jesus is GodMinor Premise: Mary is the Mother of JesusConclusion: Mary is the Mother of GodThe major premise is false, and could be considered heretical; therefore, the conclusion is false, and, it too, could be considered heretical.

Stated as a syllogism, your belief would look like this:

Major Premise: All Christians believe Jesus is God.

Minor Premise: You do not.

Conclusion: You are not Christian.

The Major premise is true and is considered orthodox, therefore the conclusion is true and ,you too, could be considered heretical.

 

[MrS]

Stated as a syllogism, your belief would look like this:

Major Premise: All Christians believe Jesus is God.

Minor Premise: You do not.

Conclusion: You are not Christian.

The Major premise is true and is considered orthodox, therefore the conclusion is true and ,you too, could be considered heretical.

smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/36/36_1_21.gif (although I think he just got confused… common virus among the separated brethren )

.

smileycentral.com/sig.jsp?pc=ZSzeb095&pp=ZN

 

[sandusky]

mercygate:

Yup. I guess you could be considered heretical, since Christianity universally affirms that Jesus, the incarnate second Person of the Trinity is indeed “God” – consubstantial, co-equal, coeternal with the Father: God of God, light of light, true God of true God . . . as stated by the Council of Constantinople.

Fidelis:

Wow! I’ve heard a lot of verbal gymnasitics to try and deny the obvious implications of this, but to go to the extreme of denying the total divinity of Christ is – well, EXTREME.

teachccd:

Stated as a syllogism, your belief would look like this:

Major Premise: All Christians believe Jesus is God.

Minor Premise: You do not.

Conclusion: You are not Christian.

The Major premise is true and is considered orthodox, therefore the conclusion is true and ,you too, could be considered heretical.

MrS:

(although I think he just got confused… common virus among the separated brethren )

None of you is reading carefully.

I’ll restate the syllogism:Major Premise: Jesus is God
Minor Premise: Mary is the Mother of Jesus
Conclusion: Mary is the Mother of GodAnd, here is what I said concerning the major premise of the syllogism:

The major premise is false, and could be considered heretical; therefore, the conclusion is false, and, it too, could be considered heretical.

Let me restate the implication of the major premise another way:All of Jesus is GodAny of you folks agree with that?

 

[mercygate]

None of you is reading carefully.

I’ll restate the syllogism:Major Premise: Jesus is God

Minor Premise: Mary is the Mother of Jesus

Conclusion: Mary is the Mother of GodAnd, here is what I said concerning the major premise of the syllogism:Let me restate the implication of the major premise another way:All of Jesus is GodAny of you folks agree with that?

The orthodox Christian position, Protestant, Catholic, and Eastern Orthodox is that Jesus is, indeed, true God. And he is true Man. He is the incarnate second Person of the Godhead. The two natures – divine and human – are inseparable, though distinct.

So yes: Jesus is 100% God. AND Jesus is 100% man. He is not a combo-creature, half God, half man. The *Catechism *puts it briefly:

The Church thus confesses that Jesus is inseparably true God and true man. He is truly the Son of God who, without ceasing to be God and Lord, became a man and our brother:

“What he was, he remained and what he was not, he assumed”, sings the Roman Liturgy. And the liturgy of St. John Chrysostom proclaims and sings: “O only-begotten Son and Word of God, immortal being, you who deigned for our salvation to become incarnate of the holy Mother of God and ever-virgin Mary, you who without change became man and were crucified, O Christ our God, you who by your death have crushed death, you who are one of the Holy Trinity, glorified with the Father and the Holy Spirit, save us!”

 

[sandusky]

The orthodox Christian position, Protestant, Catholic, and Eastern Orthodox is that Jesus is, indeed, true God. And he is true Man. He is the incarnate second Person of the Godhead. The two natures – divine and human – are inseparable, though distinct.

So yes: Jesus is 100% God. AND Jesus is 100% man. He is not a combo-creature, half God, half man.

That is not what I asked, mercygate.

I asked, “do you agree with the statement all of Jesus is God;” it seems that you do not agree with that statement; is that correct?

 

[MrS]

That is not what I asked, mercygate.

I asked, “do you agree with the statement all of Jesus is God;” it seems that you do not agree with that statement; is that correct?

Your question is a false premise…

Yes all of Jesus is God…
Yes all of Jesus is man…

your questions is begging to separate the two by agreeing only with one.

The Person of Jesus is certainly a mystery to us mortals… I will ask for a bit more faith to flow in your direction before your doubts (which you man not concede to), led you totally again from the Savior.

 

[pumpkinbeast]

“Unless you eat this Flesh and drink this Blood, you have no life within you. That means you’re] DEAD!” ~Fr. Stan Fortuna

 

[PhilVaz]

sand << I asked, “do you agree with the statement all of Jesus is God;” it seems that you do not agree with that statement; is that correct? >>

Oh please, not more Svendsenian nonsense. How about this?

(1) Jesus is God the Son, who is God and man in One divine Person.
(2) Mary is the Mother of Jesus.
(3) Therefore, Mary is mother of God the Son, who is God and man in One divine Person.

Clearer? And no, Svendsen cannot defend his “mother of the non-God part of Jesus” nonsense without going Nestorian. The Catechism of Catholic Church:

1. Called in the Gospels “the mother of Jesus,” Mary is acclaimed by Elizabeth, at the prompting of the Spirit and even before the birth of her son, as “the mother of my Lord” [Lk 1:43; Jn 2:1; 19:25; cf. Mt 13:55; et al]. In fact, the One whom she conceived as man by the Holy Spirit, who truly became her Son according to the flesh, was none other than the Father’s eternal Son, the second person of the Holy Trinity. Hence the Church confesses that Mary is truly “MOTHER OF GOD” (THEOTOKOS).

And the Calvinist who I love to quote, Max Thurian, writes –

"Mary here appears for the first time as one intimately linked with the mission of the Son of God; she is indeed the Mother of the Lord. Mother and Son are made one; the word of the mother conveys the Word of the Son, she transmits the Spirit of God, and produces a divine miracle in Elizabeth. This unity of Mother and Son emphasizes very strongly the reality of the incarnation: God has truly taken flesh in the Virgin Mary, is the Son of Mary, and MARY IS THE MOTHER OF GOD.

"It is this reality of the incarnation which is affirmed by Mary’s title of ‘MOTHER OF GOD’ – ‘theotokos,’ which the Council of Ephesus was to pronounce in A.D. 431. In order to comprehend in all its depth and breadth the mystery of the incarnation, one must acknowledge this unity of Mother and Son, of Mary and Jesus, at the time of the incarnation and confess Mary to be ‘MOTHER OF GOD.’

"Here still we can notice the physical and spiritual unity of Mary and God, which emphasizes the full reality of the Incarnation. We find a second time the truth and the sense of the dogma of Ephesus: MARY IS MOTHER OF GOD, ‘theotokos.’

"Mary is not simply an impersonal instrument which enables God to come amongst us and which one can really ignore. Her human and real person, her nature and history are linked with the incarnation of God…The divine motherhood of Mary is a truly human motherhood in the deep sense of the unity of mother and son, the human mother of God and the Son of God made man.

"A purely physical conception without any conception by the spirit would not only have been meaningless, but truly frightening; and it is not possible that redemption for men should end with the destruction of her who should be first to share in it. Mary only became the mother of this Son without peer because she could embody that motherhood in a personal sense. To do that would in the end be to lessen faith in the true humanity of Christ, and not to consider Mary as a mother in any real sense, as physical and yet also psychological and spiritual as well.

"Hence the title of ‘MOTHER OF GOD’ emphasizes all the more the humanity, as well as the true divinity, of Christ. MARY IS ‘MOTHER’ OF GOD: that means to say that God is truly one who became her son, a son in the human sense of fully man.

“MARY IS THE MOTHER OF ‘GOD’: that means to say that, as from her miraculous conception, her son was the Son of God, God Himself in his Incarnate Presence. Thus the Council of Ephesus (A.D. 431) which gave Mary the title ‘MOTHER OF GOD’ and that of Chalcedon (A.D. 451) which asserted the two natures of Christ in ONE person, are in the end saying the same thing and expressing very well the mystery of Christ who is truly God and truly man, as the Gospel states.”

(MARY, MOTHER OF ALL CHRISTIANS [Herder, 1963], p. 67-68, 72-73)

Phil P