created him out of the ground

  • Thread starter Thread starter paarsurrey
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
P

paarsurrey

Guest
Hi

I thought the point mentioned in the following post is very important:
Originally Posted by Krocker
Hello, thanks for responding. I’m not trying to be rude, but I’m not persuaded either. Your response is again just filled with generic Christian catch-phrases of seeking Truth, etc. The Truth only means what YOU think it means if you’re Catholic. I can assure you Protestants use the same notion of “Truth” to reject Catholic doctrines. So, where does that leave us? You claim your truth, Protestants claim their truth and nobody gets anywhere.
Click to expand...
My point is this: Would Jesus Christ still be the only way to Salvation if Mary never existed and God created him out of the ground as with Adam?
Click to expand...
Of course He would be. So why all the hubbub about Immaculate Conception?

So please comment on the emboldened portion without “just filled with generic Christian catch-phrases of seeking Truth” as pointed by Krocker. The rhetorics seldom benefit others, you would agree. Your own opinions solicited, please.

Thanks
 
paarsurrey said:
Hi

So please comment on the emboldened portion without “just filled with generic Christian catch-phrases of seeking Truth” as pointed by Krocker. The rhetorics seldom benefit others, you would agree. Your own opinions solicited, please.

Thanks
Click to expand...
In the ‘literal’ sense, it is incorrect for that is not what occurred. You cannot insert a maybe into a factual occurrence and then build a refutation argument upon it because the factual account has already occurred.

That’s like saying, in a stabbing homicide case, if the knife wasn’t in the kitchen where he located it, he would NOT have killed her!
Answer: Er…maybe! But the fact is, he used the knife!

In a theological view, if God had created Jesus from the ground, that would mean that God has created a new race of humans, and Jesus would not be ‘able’ to redeem the first race, because He is not ‘OF’ them. The stain of sin is in the line of the first Adam and it is that line that requires redeeming.

Moreover, if God created His Redeemer ex nihilo, then he cannot truly be said to have ‘suffered’ since God can just keep doing this whenever He feels like!

The sole reason Mary is WHO she is, is because God CHOSE her! Not Martha; not Ruth; nor Sheba or Cleopatra. All arguments against Mary, The Holy Mother of God, are immaterial and irrelevant because what occurred HAS already occurred.

Those who argue against doctrine; fine! Keep learning to understand. Those who argue against HER whould be arguing the One who Chose Her! Good Luck!!

:cool:
 
paarsurrey said:
Hi

I thought the point mentioned in the following post is very important:

So please comment on the emboldened portion without “just filled with generic Christian catch-phrases of seeking Truth” as pointed by Krocker. The rhetorics seldom benefit others, you would agree. Your own opinions solicited, please.

Thanks
Click to expand...
Dear Paar,

It means that God cancelled **His Own Word **as it is in Genesis 3:15, which is impossible. God is also faithful to His Own Promises. BTW, Deconi is correct. I am just adding the impossibilty of the situation you describe.
 
God could save the world however he wanted. I respect the way he chose.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top