Pope Pius XII "creates" doctrine out of THIN AIR!

[3AngelsMom]

Originally posted by thessalonian:
"HOLY SPIRIT had SEX with Mary to form Jesus"

Spirit does not have SEX dear. That is a function of the flesh of humans. It is by the power of the Holy Spirit not by sex with the Holy Spirit. Are you claiming that Mary had sex with the Father? Now that is blaspemy. Further it seems it creates some problems with Mary having other children by Joseph if that is what you believe.

Does God have to create humans with sex? Though that is the normative way, we know that it is not the only way, because Adam and Eve were not created in that way. Further Jesus said he "could raise up son's of Abraham from these stones" so we know God is not limited in his capacity to create life. Also Jesus (who is God if you have any doudts and not a "lesser" or "non-eternal" God as you might think) was the new adam and so this implies that he was a new creation.
Once again, more evidence that you do not believe in the Trinity as held true by Christianity including baptists like Helen for 2000 years.

Why would I try to say that Mary had sex with the father?

It is the CC's doctrine that places her as spouse of the Holy Spirit!

Not me.

NOW THAT is blasphemy!!

As far as Mary having other children, it would be YOUR doctrine that places her in a state of adultery, not mine.

It CAN be proven from Scripture that she MARRIED Joseph, and that Jesus had brothers, promoting the probability of Mary having sex with Joseph. WHY wouldn't they have had sex???? They were married!

It would be the 'Holy Spouse' garbage that would place her in adultery.

If Jesus was made in the same way that Adam was, then all Mary was is an incubator.

Making her nothing more than a surrogate.

Think about that.

I have heard that if you DON'T put Mary as important to the bringing in of the Redeemer (hence the coredemptrix status) then you are saying it was a 'divine rape'. That it was her 'fiat' or yes, for those of us who speak English, that makes her important. She said 'yes' so that makes her partially responsible for the Redemption?

NOW, if saying her 'yes' DOES NOT have any redemptive power, makes it divine rape, then agreeing that her yes DOES have redemptive power makes it consentual sex.

The opposite of RAPE is consentual sex.

I don't know why you insist on labelling me through your ignorace. I never said that I placed Jesus lower than the Father.

NEVER.

Not that it matters, but I really don't care how long people have agreed on something. People thought the earth was flat for a REALLY long time. Were they right?

God Bless

 

[3AngelsMom]

Originally posted by GraceSaves:
Mom,

You fail to see marriage outside the context of flesh-to-flesh marriage, instead of marriage as God sees marriage. And no, I don't need to prove anything, because this issue is a fabrication of your own that I do not believe and the Church has never taught.

You're on your own, and I won't answer a question that does not pertain to me or my beliefs or those of my Church.

God bless,

Grant

So then you don't agree with Bro. Ed?

He said Mary is the Holy Spirits Spouse.

Do you not believe the same things as him?

God Bless

 

[3AngelsMom]

Originally posted by Carson Weber:
I wouldn't even dare participate in a discussion wherein my partner in dialogue would actually purport that Catholics place Mary within the Godhead.. and persists.

God bless those who think so, and enjoy your wallowing in ignorance. If that's how low you want to step, enjoy the muck. I'm not going to drag you out of it. You chose it.

I sure hope you aren't talking about me.

I don't think that any Catholics believe all of what I posted!

I think they believe that Mary is the HS's spouse.

My post was intended to show the rediculous implications of calling her that.

I would think that YOU of all people here would know that I don't really think that!

God Bless

 

[GraceSaves]

Mom,

Being a spouse of the Holy Spirit does not have the same implications of human, earthly marriage. It in no way implies (as you insinuate) a physical sexual relationship. It in no way implies that Mary somehow sheds her status of creature and becomes God (something that is absolutely impossible). These are not real implications. You may wish them to be, but they are not. And they never will be.

So, yes, I do believe in accordance with Brother Ed, that Mary is the spouse of the Holy Spirit, but that this does not have these implications that you are forcing onto the situation in order to discredit a belief that you have close to zero real knowledge about, especially outside of anti-Catholic sources.

Oh, but you did a nice job dishonoring your Spiritual mother by calling her an "incubator."

You've already made up your mind to believe whatever drivel the Internet gives you. Why bother asking us questions when you know we will obviously disagree and then reject that we really believe what we say we believe? That's a classic plea of ignorance. You're not secure enough in your own beliefs, or else you would be truly open to understanding what we believe without telling us what you think we believe.

God bless,

Grant

 

[3AngelsMom]

Grant,

You assume too much.

The only information that I have about this doctrine is what I have gotten from the Catholics on this message board!

I have said it before, I will say it again.

I do not USE slam sites, and I will not argue with information from them.

(you see we SDA's have the same problem you Catholics do, no one does their own homework)

That is why I am asking you!

I don't know anything about it.

Mary is not my spiritual mother!

I don't have a spiritual mother!

I have a Father, a Brother, and a Comforter!

No mention ANYWHERE in the Bible of me having a spiritual mother!

Sorry if I offended you, but you must see how rediculous this doctrine appears to those who don't hold the same opinion as you about Mary in the first place.

God Bless

 

[trying2understand]

Originally posted by 3AngelsMom:
That is why I am asking you!

I don't know anything about it.

It may be helpful to the discussion if you were to also share your belief.

Was Mary a surrogate mother?

Or was any part of her human nature involved in the conception of our Lord?

 

[3AngelsMom]

Trying,

I was not stating my beliefs when I stated that.

Sheesh.

I feel like I am talking to kids sometimes.

It was said by someone (thessalonian I think) that Jesus was the new Adam and that He is a new creature like Adam.

I said that if THIS (what he said) is true, then This NEW Creature (Jesus) was PUT in Mary as an ALREADY formed person (like Adam) and thus that would make her a surrogate, not a mother.

I believe that the Holy Spirit concieved Jesus in Mary, supernaturally.

Just like the Bible says.

Conception usually involves an egg and a sperm. Mary would have been the provider of the egg and the Holy Spirit either made the egg start growing into a baby or LITERALLY put the 'seed' of God into it. One way or the other, Jesus was part God and part Mary at conception.

How else could He have been TOTALLY man and TOTALLY God?

I am TOTALLY my mothers child, and TOTALLY my dads child. They made a union of their egg and sperm and it made me! I am both of them put together.

That is how I see Jesus. He is the 'seed of David'. AND the 'Son of God'.

God Bless

 

[trying2understand]

Originally posted by 3AngelsMom:

Conception usually involves an egg and a sperm. Mary would have been the provider of the egg and the Holy Spirit either made the egg start growing into a baby or LITERALLY put the 'seed' of God into it. One way or the other, Jesus was part God and part Mary at conception.

How else could He have been TOTALLY man and TOTALLY God?

That is how I see Jesus. He is the 'seed of David'. AND the 'Son of God'.

Ok, good. I am in agreement with you so far.

Now, will you apply the same line of thinking to the above that you do with "Mary is the spouse of the Holy Spirit"?

"Since God is the KING, and Mary is YOUR Queen and according to this sick and disturbing doctrine of demons the HOLY SPIRIT had SEX with Mary to form Jesus, then MARY is part of the God Head."

Aside from denying Mary to be the spouse of the Holy Spirit, how does your above remark not apply to your belief concerning the relationship between Mary and the Holy Spirit?

 

[thessalonian]

"I said that if THIS (what he said) is true, then This NEW Creature (Jesus) was PUT in Mary as an ALREADY formed person (like Adam) and thus that would make her a surrogate, not a mother."

And you feel like your talking to little kids. Sheesh. Where did I say he was an already formed person. I just said that he was formed in a mode different than other humans apparently. I didn't say what it was and I don't know specifically other than that it was something special (i.e. supernatural).

 

[thessalonian]

AngelMom,

"I don't know why you insist on labelling me through your ignorace. I never said that I placed Jesus lower than the Father.

NEVER."

My your testy today. And I never claimed you did but apparently you don't like having questions asked of your faith. I will ask again anyway. By the way, once again your answer is evasive as you don't say that Jesus is equal to the Father. Just that you never said he was lower.

I have been asking you directly for several days questions about the Trinity which you have refused to answer directly. I know you have seen them because you apparently see everything else that I post. I have not once said you did believe Jesus was a lesser God but in my experience many SDA's do and I am wondering how you come down on this issue, since there apparently isn't a consensus in your denomination. Further I want to know if you thing Jesus is an eternal God or if he was begotten at a specific point in time? The SDA's I have dealt with in the past have avoided these questoins so that other Christians will consider them the good guys for as long as possible. I notice from some of Crissy's comments that it is likely that she has the Godhead as a tritheistic God, which is implied by the first question. So if you want to accuse me of ignorance go ahead. I readily admit I don't know where you stand on these two issues and that is why I am asking. Can you give a straight answer?

 

[3AngelsMom]

Thess,

Sorry if I seem testy, I have been sick, and my ears are hurting me.

I am not avoiding your question.

I just don't want to get into to it.

I am not really sure right now where I stand on the trinity issue. I am prayerfully considering, and studying it right now.

I do not think Jesus is LOWER than the Father.

However, I am not sure if I agree with the trinitarian thought of most denominations.

Will that suffice for now?

God Bless

 

[3AngelsMom]

Originally posted by thessalonian:
"I said that if THIS (what he said) is true, then This NEW Creature (Jesus) was PUT in Mary as an ALREADY formed person (like Adam) and thus that would make her a surrogate, not a mother."

And you feel like your talking to little kids. Sheesh. Where did I say he was an already formed person. I just said that he was formed in a mode different than other humans apparently. I didn't say what it was and I don't know specifically other than that it was something special (i.e. supernatural).

You didn't say He was already a formed person. You said He was like Adam. Adam was a formed person. He was not the result of an egg/sperm union, but rather was created soley by the Power of God. If Jesus is just like Adam, but yet He grew in a womb, then His 'makeup' is that of God alone, like Adam, (earth from God, breath from God) and Mary was only there for the service of carrying Him to term.

You did say He was like Adam.

Otherwise I wouldn't have expounded on it!

God Bless

 

[3AngelsMom]

Originally posted by trying2understand:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by 3AngelsMom:

Conception usually involves an egg and a sperm. Mary would have been the provider of the egg and the Holy Spirit either made the egg start growing into a baby or LITERALLY put the 'seed' of God into it. One way or the other, Jesus was part God and part Mary at conception.

How else could He have been TOTALLY man and TOTALLY God?

That is how I see Jesus. He is the 'seed of David'. AND the 'Son of God'.

Ok, good. I am in agreement with you so far.

Now, will you apply the same line of thinking to the above that you do with "Mary is the spouse of the Holy Spirit"?

"Since God is the KING, and Mary is YOUR Queen and according to this sick and disturbing doctrine of demons the HOLY SPIRIT had SEX with Mary to form Jesus, then MARY is part of the God Head."

Aside from denying Mary to be the spouse of the Holy Spirit, how does your above remark not apply to your belief concerning the relationship between Mary and the Holy Spirit? </font>[/QUOTE]I have no idea what you are asking me to do.

Jesus was concieved by the Holy Spirit SUPERNATURALLY.

That means NOT naturally, which we all know that the NATURAL means of conception is SEX.

Conception is NOT what makes two people married.

SEX is what consecrates a marriage.

I have been married for 3 years and haven't conceived. I am still married though aren't I?

You betcha!

Mary was espoused to Joseph. By placing her in a spousal role with the Holy Spirit, it is implying adultery.

She was ALREADY espoused to Joseph when the Holy Spirit came to her. He told her AND him to get married. Their marriage was consecrated. I would bet my life on it.

It even says that he didn't 'know' her until her days were completed!

Mat 1:24 Then Joseph being raised from sleep did as the angel of the Lord had bidden him, and took unto him his wife:
Mat 1:25 And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS.

I must say that it is TOTALLY apparent from this verse that they DID indeed have sex, AFTER Jesus was born.

It says UNTIL. (till)

Here is a prime example of another instance of 'until'.

Matthew 5:18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

You see, it is a "once this happens then THIS will happen" sort of wording. The law won't pass until ALL of it is fulfilled, not even one jot. (do you feel the earth under you? Do you see the heaven above?)

Same with Mary and Joseph, he WOULD not know her until she gave birth to Jesus. And JUST LIKE THE LAW, when that time was fulfilled, HE KNEW HER.

Was Jesus born? Then Joseph knew Mary.

God Bless

 

[Chrissy]

Thessalonians:

That I May Know Him, page 11, Ellen White
Chapter Title: Christ the Eternal Word
"Christ, the Word, the only begotten of God, was one with the eternal Father,--one in nature, in character, in purpose,--the only being that could enter into all the counsels and purposes of God. "His name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace." His "goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting." And the Son of God declares concerning Himself: "The Lord possessed me in the beginning of his way, before his works of old. I was set up from everlasting. . . . When he appointed the foundations of the earth: then I was by him, as one brought up with him" (Isa 9:6; Micah 5:2; Prov. 8:22-30).

The Father wrought by His Son in the creation of all heavenly beings. "By him were all things created, . . . whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him" (Col. 1:16). Angels are God's ministers, radiant with the light ever flowing from His presence, and speeding on rapid wing to execute His will. But the Son, the anointed of God, the "express image of his person," "the brightness of his glory," "upholding all things by the word of his power," holds supremacy over them all (Heb. 1:3).

Christ was God essentially, and in the highest sense. . . . The Lord Jesus Christ, the divine Son of God, existed from eternity, a distinct person, yet one with the Father. He was the surpassing glory of heaven. He was the commander of the heavenly intelligences, and the adoring homage of the angels was received by Him as His right. . . .

There are light and glory in the truth that Christ was one with the Father before the foundation of the world was laid. This is the light shining in a dark place, making it resplendent with divine, original glory."

sorry, I dont have time for more.

 

[Chrissy]

Grace Saves,

no you dont have to have a library card to read it.

 

[Chrissy]

I had just glanced at stuff on here and saw someone saying something about that you have to be anti-catholic to be a Seventh day Adventist.

ABSOLUTELY TRUE.

A true Seventh Day Adventist is anti-Catholic. The teachings of Roman Catholicism are pagan in origin. We are to make NO concessions with it.

However, we also believe that many many Catholics are more devoted to God than some Protestants are, but are just living up to the light that they have.

The TRUE Seventh day Adventist position is that Revelation 14 and 18 (the Three Angel's Messages) tells us that God is calling HIS PEOPLE out of Babylon. The entire system of Roman Catholcism is wrong. But many sincere Christians are in that system, in ignorance.
Yet God refers to both Catholic and Protestants who are somehow involved in that system as being "His People" and He commands they "come out of Babylon".


Revelation chapter 14:
6: And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people,
7: Saying with a loud voice, Fear God, and give glory to him; for the hour of his judgment is come: and worship him that made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and the fountains of waters.
8: And there followed another angel, saying, Babylon is fallen, is fallen, that great city, because she made all nations drink of the wine of the wrath of her fornication.
9: And the third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice, If any man worship the beast and his image, and receive his mark in his forehead, or in his hand,
10: The same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation; and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb:
11: And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name.
12: Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.

Rv:18:4: And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues.


We do not hate Catholics or anybody in any Religion. It is not our right or duty to do that.

In addition, we do NOT hold to the idea that many assume we do, which is that people in other denominations are walking around with 'THE MARK OF THE BEAST'. TRUE Adventists teach no such thing. When the Three Angel's Messages are in the future given with great power, and all are convicted, then if people refuse to heed the call they will receive the Mark of the Beast.

If you would like to know more about these things and our feelings toward the Catholic Church, you can go read the book "The Great Controversy" here:

http://www.egwestate.andrews.edu/gc/gc.html

------------

as a side note, I am sorry if some insist upon making their remarks about me not answering people. I believe my first duty is to God, then my husband... everything else comes after that. I have to get my duties here at home accomplished first, and if I have time to do anything else and believe it is something that God wants me to do, than I will do that. I usually try to give people the information I think they need. I am sorry but that is just the way that it is.

[ February 24, 2003, 07:01 PM: Message edited by: Chrissy ]

 

[trying2understand]

Originally posted by 3AngelsMom:
Jesus was concieved by the Holy Spirit SUPERNATURALLY.

You say this as though this is not what Catholics believe.

BTW, by saying that Mary is the spouse of the Holy Spirit it also is meant SUPERNATURALLY.

 

[Chrissy]

...also, I apologize for my comment about not casting pearls before the swine, I was "all out of snorts" when I said it. I needed to apply oinkment to my wounds but now I feel better.

:-/

 

[thessalonian]

Originally posted by 3AngelsMom:
Thess,

Sorry if I seem testy, I have been sick, and my ears are hurting me.

I am not avoiding your question.

I just don't want to get into to it.

I am not really sure right now where I stand on the trinity issue. I am prayerfully considering, and studying it right now.

I do not think Jesus is LOWER than the Father.

However, I am not sure if I agree with the trinitarian thought of most denominations.

Will that suffice for now?

God Bless

Fair enough. Thanks for the answer.

 

[Chrissy]

I should've added that this illustrates how all Christians ought to feel toward every human being... regardless of their religion:


http://www.egwestate.andrews.edu/da/da54.html


It is a commentary on the story of the Good Samaritan, which I totally agree with.

It should be an easy concept to understand... such as, when Jesus had said to His disciples, "Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees" -the Pharisees taught false doctrine, but this did not mean that Jesus "hated" them. He was "anti-Phariseeism" yet loved the Pharisees.

..and Jesus is our example.