Most vile concept/aspect of christianity?

Originally posted by DoctorScribbles
So, scratch (2) off the list. I was asking about why we can't all come into existence via immaculate conception.

Why should (2) be scratched off the list?

Originally posted by lucifershammer
Why should (2) be scratched off the list?

Because it is not coherent.

You say that her manner of coming into existence is conditional upon her consent to something, but consent can only be given subsequent to the beginning of one's existence.

It does not answer the question of why we cannot all come into existence in the same immaculate manner as Mary did.

Originally posted by lucifershammer
I meant her consent to the Annunciation.

How could she consent to this before existing?

Originally posted by DoctorScribbles
Why don't all of God's children receive such immaculate conception? It seems like the decent thing for God to do, if it is in his power.

For one, there is nothing whatsoever in the manner of biblical support for such a proposition. The humanity of Jesus was without the sin nature by virtue of the manner of conception, specifically related to the casting off process.

For two, without the imputation of Adam's original sin, man would be born completely without hope of salvation. Seems like the decent thing for God to do, since it is within His power, to devise a system by which man can be saved without compromising God's righteousness.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
For one, there is nothing whatsoever in the manner of biblical support for such a proposition.

Of course there's not. It's something Catholics invented.

Originally posted by DoctorScribbles
How could she consent to this before existing?

In time, she didn't.

Originally posted by DoctorScribbles
Because it is not coherent.

You say that her manner of coming into existence is conditional upon her consent to something, but consent can only be given subsequent to the beginning of one's existence.

It does not answer the question of why we cannot all come into existence in the same immaculate manner as Mary did.

It is coherent if you separate causality from time.

As to why all of us cannot come into existence in the same manner as Mary, we don't have the same role to play in salvation history.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
For one, there is nothing whatsoever in the manner of biblical support for such a proposition. The humanity of Jesus was without the sin nature by virtue of the manner of conception, specifically related to the casting off process.

For two, without the imputation of Adam's original sin, man would be born completely without hope of salvation. Seems lik ...[text shortened]... power, to devise a system by which man can be saved without compromising God's righteousness.

What??? If there was no original sin we'd have no hope of salvation? How does that work?

Originally posted by lucifershammer
In time, she didn't.

Of course not, because that would be ridiculous.

So, can you provide any non-circular reasons for why God does not allow us all to come into the world in the same state of grace as Mary did?

Originally posted by lucifershammer


As to why all of us cannot come into existence in the same manner as Mary, we don't have the same role to play in salvation history.

This puts the cart before the horse.

There would be no need for any such role playing if we all come into existence in grace as Mary did.

Originally posted by lucifershammer
It is coherent if you separate causality from time.

Separating causality from time is incoherent. Causes always preceed effects. Consent is always given subsequent to conception.

Originally posted by DoctorScribbles
Of course not, because that would be ridiculous.

So, can you provide any non-circular reasons for why God does not allow us all to come into the world in the same state of grace as Mary did?

Because we don't deserve to be immaculate conceptions. And because, in baptism, we have sufficient means to escape original sin.

Btw, where is my reasoning circular?

Originally posted by lucifershammer
Because we don't deserve to be immaculate conceptions.

What did Mary do to deserve her immaculate conception?

I don't see what dessert has to do with it anyway. We don't deserve grace via baptism either, but God allows us to receive it that way.

Originally posted by DoctorScribbles
Separating causality from time is incoherent. Causes always preceed effects.

Not always. My Special Relativity is a little rusty, but IIRC for a frame of reference at the speed of light, cause and effect would be simultaneous.

Causes always preceed effects, but must they always be in time?

Originally posted by lucifershammer


Causes always preceed effects, but must they always be in time?

In what other realm would precedence operate, such that Mary's consent could precede her existence?