- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Just a thought - The Immaculate Conception
Posted on 12/15/23 at 2:12 pm to bayoubengals88
Posted on 12/15/23 at 2:12 pm to bayoubengals88
quote:
Also, what's up with 4cubbies and liz being Catholic?
Those Catholic girls start much too late
0
Posted on 12/15/23 at 2:25 pm to LittleJerrySeinfield
quote:
What you call "weird", some would call Scriptural. What Catholicism teaches about Mary is not.
Potato, Potahto.
quote:
Nor was it taught for nearly a millenium after Christ's birth.
Yeah, I'm going to need a cite for this one.
Posted on 12/15/23 at 2:33 pm to Mo Jeaux
quote:
Nor was it taught for nearly a millenium after Christ's birth.
quote:
Yeah, I'm going to need a cite for this one.
Just trying to be fair here, but logically, wouldn't the burden of proof be on you to demonstrate that the immaculate conception was taught in the same millennium of Christ's birth?
I don't buy the development of doctrine theory here. There's no reason for it to have developed that late.
It's like saying dispensationalism was a necessary development in the 19th century
***I'm not saying she wasn't without sin by the way***
This post was edited on 12/15/23 at 2:34 pm
Posted on 12/15/23 at 2:43 pm to bayoubengals88
quote:
Just trying to be fair here, but logically, wouldn't the burden of proof be on you to demonstrate that the immaculate conception was taught in the same millennium of Christ's birth?
The burden of proof is on anyone making a claim that is not subject to common knowledge. Church teachings about Mary go back to at least the 4th century.
Posted on 12/15/23 at 2:57 pm to Mo Jeaux
How, logically can you prove a historical negative??
So until you do that, your opponent has won the argument.
quote:Ok, well then, it is you who must provide the evidence.
Church teachings about Mary go back to at least the 4th century.
So until you do that, your opponent has won the argument.
Posted on 12/15/23 at 3:08 pm to Mo Jeaux
quote:
Church teachings about Mary go back to at least the 4th century.
Catholic church teachings... and no, the Baptist Church didn't come around until 1609, but the Immaculate Conception isn't part of our doctrine and furthermore, simply isn't scriptural. What is part of our doctrine is that Mary was a virgin when she gave birth to Jesus and it was a miraculous pregnancy. She had other children. That's actually in the bible.
The Catholics aren't the only "game in town" and aren't always right...
Of course, your mind can't be changed on the subject just as mine can't be. We simply have completely different viewpoints and interpretations of certain issues... none of which are vital to our salvation.
This post was edited on 12/15/23 at 3:09 pm
Posted on 12/15/23 at 3:16 pm to MemphisGuy
quote:The early church is everyone's church. Even your's. As a Baptist, you will reject a lot of it, but that era does house your spiritual roots.
MemphisGuy
As a Presbyterian who is more ecumenical than any Baptist, I would be happier to claim more of those early teachings.
((this is how the conversation gets going in the right direction by the way))...
No, the Catholics are not the only game in town, but they are the default Christian Church in the West that we have to contend with.
I do think that the Immaculate Conception is one of the weaker "inerrant" doctrines of Roman Catholicism. The evidence must be pretty scarce if it wasn't canonized until the latter 19th century. What made it so vital then?
Posted on 12/15/23 at 3:23 pm to bayoubengals88
quote:
The early church is everyone's church.
Oh, I know that, never meant to imply otherwise.
quote:
As a Presbyterian who is more ecumenical than any Baptist, I would be happier to claim more of those early teachings.
I actually grew up Southern Baptist, but went to 2nd Pres here in town for about 4 years after I got of of college. They had a simply awesome pastor. Preacher... whatever Presbys call their head minister. Name was Sandy Willson. Anyways, I'm happy to claim most of them as well. Some, not so much, such as the Immaculate Conception.
Also no dancing. There shall be no dancing.
This post was edited on 12/15/23 at 3:26 pm
Posted on 12/15/23 at 3:30 pm to MemphisGuy
quote:Yeah, that might be the most famous Presbyterian church in the South. Sandy Willson is renowned.
Sandy Willson
Pastor/Minister is typically what they are called.
This post was edited on 12/15/23 at 3:32 pm
Posted on 12/15/23 at 3:34 pm to Mo Jeaux
quote:
quote:
This is what makes the virgin birth even more significant. Jesus had to be sinless to be a perfect sacrifice to atone for all sins. He didn’t have a human father, so sin did not get passed down to him.
This is dumb.
I don't know what Bible you read but this is the correct answer. Romans 5:12 and proceeding verses clearly state this. Not sure why you think it's dumb?
Posted on 12/15/23 at 3:34 pm to bayoubengals88
quote:
Yeah, that might be the most famous Presbyterian church in the South.
Didn't know that... (always thought that was D.James Kennedy)... just remember he was good. Also had an assistant pastor named Rocky that was good as well.
This post was edited on 12/15/23 at 3:36 pm
Posted on 12/15/23 at 3:45 pm to bayoubengals88
quote:
Also, what's up with 4cubbies and liz being Catholic?
Why assume Liz is not Catholic?
Page 13 of 13
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News