Author Topic: Jesus' birth was not a phantasm  (Read 1531 times)

Offline Philip G.

  • Feldwebel
  • ***
  • Posts: 1503
  • Thanked: 617 times
  • Ordinary Cult
  • Religion: Catholic
Re: Jesus' birth was not a phantasm
« Reply #15 on: April 22, 2021, 10:45:57 PM »
PhilG.
Quote
But, it was certainly not like light passing through glass.  It was bodily.  It was corporeal.  It was proximate a healthy woman giving a highly successful birth.  Except, it was blissfully above and beyond that.  I mean, baby Jesus was circumcised shortly thereafter.  His birth was perceived by the naked eye.  If the eye is sound, the whole body is sound.  Thomas doubted the resurrected Christ.  Did Thomas doubt the miracles Jesus performed during his ministry?  I doubt it.
A normal birth would have caused the loss of corporal Virginity; the birth of Our Lord was miraculous; He passed through the womb of the Blessed Virgin like He passed through the closed door of the Cenacle.  The Circumcision was not miraculous and Our Lord suffered and shed His blood for us for the first time. This is not an apt comparison. However, just as Our Lord entered the Cenacle from outside of it and was suddenly present to the Apostles, so would His birth have been.
I said his birth was "proximate".  That is not synonymous with "normal".  It means it was more like the type of birth I mention than it is like light passing through glass.  That is the significance of the word.  Don't attribute to it that which is not implied contextually or textually.

You cannot compare in this regard the resurrected body of Christ with his body prior that, which is the body of his birth.  During Jesus' ministry he never walked through any walls.  He walked on water, and during his third temptation he was carried through the air by the devil, who is a spirit.  The virgin mary is not a spirit, and she carried baby Jesus.  It can therefore be implied that his birth was not like Jesus flying through the air with the devil, which is proximate light traveling through glass.
For the stone shall cry out of the wall; and the timber that is between the joints of the building, shall answer.  Woe to him that buildeth a town with blood, and prepareth a city by iniquity. - Habacuc 2,11-12
 

Offline Justin Martyr

  • Slave of Mary
  • Korporal
  • **
  • Posts: 323
  • Thanked: 243 times
  • Religion: Roman Catholic
Re: Jesus' birth was not a phantasm
« Reply #16 on: April 23, 2021, 08:06:56 AM »
I haven't dug through all the Patristics granted, but I'm pretty sure they all agree the the Nativity occured in the way Michael Wilson describes. If this is the case, then according to the Council of Trent we must interpret it as they did; "Furthermore, in order to restrain petulant spirits, It decrees, that no one, relying on his own skill, shall,–in matters of faith, and of morals pertaining to the edification of Christian doctrine, –wresting the sacred Scripture to his own senses, presume to interpret the said sacred Scripture contrary to that sense which holy mother Church,–whose it is to judge of the true sense and interpretation of the holy Scriptures,–hath held and doth hold; or even contrary to the unanimous consent of the Fathers."
« Last Edit: April 23, 2021, 11:34:55 AM by Justin Martyr »
QVICVMQVE•VVLT•SALVVS•ESSE•ANTE•OMNIA•
OPVS•EST•VT•TENEAT•CATHOLICAM•FIDEM

QVAM•NISI•QVISQVE•INTEGRAM•INVIOLATAMQVE•
SERVAVERIT•ABSQVE•DVBIO•IN•ÆTERNUM•PERIBIT
 
The following users thanked this post: Melkor

Offline Melkor

  • Wachtmeister
  • ***
  • Posts: 898
  • Thanked: 1127 times
  • memento mori
  • Religion: Roman Catholic
Re: Jesus' birth was not a phantasm
« Reply #17 on: April 23, 2021, 11:04:02 AM »
"Furthermore, in order to restrain petulant spirits, It decrees, that no one, relying on his own skill, shall,–in matters of faith, and of morals pertaining to the edification of Christian doctrine, –wresting the sacred Scripture to his own senses, presume to interpret the said sacred Scripture contrary to that sense which holy mother Church,–whose it is to judge of the true sense and interpretation of the holy Scriptures,–hath held and doth hold; or even contrary to the unanimous consent of the Fathers."

Hmm sound like anyone you know Phillip?
All that is gold does not glitter, not all those who wander are lost.

"Let a man walk ten miles steadily on a hot summer's day along a dusty English road, and he will soon discover why beer was invented." - G.K. Chesterton

"Blessed are they that hunger and thirst after justice: for they shall have their fill." Jesus Christ
 

Offline Michael Wilson

  • St. Joseph's Workbench
  • Hauptmann
  • ****
  • Posts: 9575
  • Thanked: 9010 times
  • Religion: Catholic
Re: Jesus' birth was not a phantasm
« Reply #18 on: April 23, 2021, 05:03:35 PM »
PhilipG.I said his birth was "proximate".  That is not synonymous with "normal".  It means it was more like the type of birth I mention than it is like light passing through glass.  That is the significance of the word.  Don't attribute to it that which is not implied contextually or textually.[/QUOTE]
"Proximate" means (according to the online dictionary) "Closest in relationship; immediate"
No, it wasn't "proximate", it was miraculous i.e. Unlike any other birth.
Quote

You cannot compare in this regard the resurrected body of Christ with his body prior that, which is the body of his birth.  During Jesus' ministry he never walked through any walls.  He walked on water, and during his third temptation he was carried through the air by the devil, who is a spirit.  The virgin mary is not a spirit, and she carried baby Jesus.  It can therefore be implied that his birth was not like Jesus flying through the air with the devil, which is proximate light traveling through glass.
Yes, He transfigured His body on the mount, before His three Apostles. As I posted before; by His hypostatic union, our Lord had the privilege of the Beatific vision from the first moment of His conception and His body could have been at all times as it was in the Transfiguration; He suspended these effects in order to be able to suffer; but He could "unsuspend" them at any time.
The Virgin Mary was a woman with the privilege of perpetual Virginity of both soul and body. His birth was miraculous as it preserved our Lady's physical virginity; in the manner similar to Our Lord's passing through the closed doors of the Cenacle.
"The World Must Conform to Our Lord and not He to it." Rev. Dennis Fahey CSSP

"My brothers, all of you, if you are condemned to see the triumph of evil, never applaud it. Never say to evil: you are good; to decadence: you are progess; to death: you are life. Sanctify yourselves in the times wherein God has placed you; bewail the evils and the disorders which God tolerates; oppose them with the energy of your works and your efforts, your life uncontaminated by error, free from being led astray, in such a way that having lived here below, united with the Spirit of the Lord, you will be admitted to be made but one with Him forever and ever: But he who is joined to the Lord is one in spirit." Cardinal Pie of Potiers
 
The following users thanked this post: Melkor

Offline Philip G.

  • Feldwebel
  • ***
  • Posts: 1503
  • Thanked: 617 times
  • Ordinary Cult
  • Religion: Catholic
Re: Jesus' birth was not a phantasm
« Reply #19 on: November 28, 2021, 11:03:27 PM »
I just happened to be reading the council of Toledo year 400Ad, and I came across some anathemas and a creed formula relevant to the topic.  For starters, I do not exactly know how to interpret these two anathemas.  But, I don't think I am far off attributing them to support my cause. They have been sourced from denzinger directly.  What is in parenthesis is an interpretation of what the actual anathema means according to the experts tasked with interpreting and compiling this for Denzinger.  How old these interpretations are I do not know, but it would be useful information.  Number 26 seems easy enough to interpret in light of number 27, in that it appears also to distinguish from what is the main content in 27, which I think is what most of us associate with the words used.  And, this is why number 26 becomes so intriguing.  What exactly is it referring to?  Either way, I think it is relevant to a theory claiming that Christ's birth can only be grasped in the sense that it occurred as light passing through glass, which I am in opposition to.

Council of Toledo 400/447AD number 6 DZ 26 - "If anyone says and or believes that the Son of God, as God, suffered(in place of this: "that Christ cannot be born"), let him be anathema". 

Consider Dz 26 in light of what directly follows.

Number 7 DZ27 - "If anyone says and or believes that he man Jesus Christ was a man incapable of suffering (in place of this: "the divine nature of Christ was changeable or capable of suffering") let him be anathema".

Next for a section from the council of Toledo creed formula, that is relevant.  It regards Christ not being simply a form or phantasm, and therefore always having a "matter" as Christ.  This would naturally include "baby Jesus".  I will get to the consequences of this doctrine in light of the OP/conversation at hand.  BTW, I was not aware of these anathemas and creed formula when I started this thread.

DZ 20 - "Therefore this son of God, God, born of the father entirely before every beginning, has sanctified in the womb, (the womb), of the Blessed Mary Virgin, and from her has assumed true man, human nature having been begotten without the (virile) seed of man, that is (our) Lord Jesus Christ. Not (And not) an imaginary body or one constituted of form alone(in place of this: or that it belong to some phantasm in him), but a firm (and true) one." 
« Last Edit: November 28, 2021, 11:05:11 PM by Philip G. »
For the stone shall cry out of the wall; and the timber that is between the joints of the building, shall answer.  Woe to him that buildeth a town with blood, and prepareth a city by iniquity. - Habacuc 2,11-12
 

Offline Philip G.

  • Feldwebel
  • ***
  • Posts: 1503
  • Thanked: 617 times
  • Ordinary Cult
  • Religion: Catholic
Re: Jesus' birth was not a phantasm
« Reply #20 on: November 29, 2021, 12:06:26 AM »
The consequences of the above would be that either baby Jesus at his birth during this miraculous light through glass event ceased to be "matter" and alone consisted of a "form"/phantasm.  That appears to be contrary to an early church formula.  The other consequence would be that Jesus was form and matter during this miraculous event, and it was the Virgin Mary who ceased to consist of matter, but only consisted of a "form". 

What are the consequence(s) of the Virgin Mary throughout the entire duration of her life not always consisting of both matter and form?  Because, this would seem to be the only way to justify a miracle birth theory.  Let us consider this.  My first thought is that women do run the risk of dying in childbirth.  That would seem to me to be a potential height of suffering for a woman/mother.  If Our Lady ceased to be a type of matter at the moment of Christ's birth, enabling this miracle(not labelling it light through glass however), which also happens to be the moment when St. Joseph fell asleep(interesting connection in my opinion when sleep is a name/concept/word synonymous with death.  Or in other words, St. Joseph, Mary's spouse, was materially there, but being asleep, not "form"ally there.  And, Mary on the other hand, was "form"ally there, bt not "matter"ially there) perhaps this is so for Mary to unite herself with (and therefore bring a type of "co-redemption" to) the great sufferings a mother who dies in childbirth experiences by herself/the Virgin Mary "living it"(pun intended).  How else can Mary be in "solidarity" with these women?  She can be in "solidarity" by dying in potentially a very real sense with them in her own labor.  If Christ's passion, death, and resurrection are a threefold mystery, why would not Mary regarding Christ's coming into this world not have her own threefold comparison?  And, could this comparison be simply called, the holy family?  More time would be needed for speculation/meditation on the concept.  Anyway, if the holy family itself is a comparable miracle, the best part is that only the Holy Family witnesses it.

However, in this speculation, there lies a rebuttal of the "light through glass concept".  For, the glass is that which is the "matter" representing Mary, and the "light" is that which only has the form, representing Christ.  And, that is opposite of what I propose above.  Is the phrase still a harmless simile?  I guess that is the beauty in miracles.  There is no equal.  Do we have a preferred simile/metaphor for Christ's passion, death, and resurrection? 

Of all the meditations/consequences I can think of regarding this, I think the immediate above is inseparable from any others for the time being, and at the same time significant enough that I need not continue any further.  Because, the consequences are too much for me to consider in this post.

I will however say, so much for the common "mary died and was buried" nonsense so that she could "be in solidarity with Christ's suffereings and suffer death as he did blah blah".  What an offensive and erroneous concept.  To think that the Mother of God had dirt thrown over her.  No.  Mary didn't die. 
« Last Edit: November 29, 2021, 01:02:35 AM by Philip G. »
For the stone shall cry out of the wall; and the timber that is between the joints of the building, shall answer.  Woe to him that buildeth a town with blood, and prepareth a city by iniquity. - Habacuc 2,11-12
 

Offline Philip G.

  • Feldwebel
  • ***
  • Posts: 1503
  • Thanked: 617 times
  • Ordinary Cult
  • Religion: Catholic
Re: Jesus' birth was not a phantasm
« Reply #21 on: November 29, 2021, 12:31:47 AM »
Also, please forgive me for how "rough" a draft my above post is.  I am a working man.  I do not have the time, energy, or status to invest in presenting myself as a profession.  However, this is not going to stop me from opening my mind if it can help convert the church from its current negative state of affairs. 
« Last Edit: November 29, 2021, 12:41:12 AM by Philip G. »
For the stone shall cry out of the wall; and the timber that is between the joints of the building, shall answer.  Woe to him that buildeth a town with blood, and prepareth a city by iniquity. - Habacuc 2,11-12
 

Offline Melkor

  • Wachtmeister
  • ***
  • Posts: 898
  • Thanked: 1127 times
  • memento mori
  • Religion: Roman Catholic
Re: Jesus' birth was not a phantasm
« Reply #22 on: November 29, 2021, 10:39:09 AM »

    No.  Mary didn't die.

https://taylormarshall.com/2013/08/did-the-virgin-mary-die.html

"Venerable to us, O Lord, is the festivity of this day on which the holy Mother of God suffered temporal death, but still could not be kept down by the bonds of death, who has begotten your Son our Lord incarnate from herself.”
All that is gold does not glitter, not all those who wander are lost.

"Let a man walk ten miles steadily on a hot summer's day along a dusty English road, and he will soon discover why beer was invented." - G.K. Chesterton

"Blessed are they that hunger and thirst after justice: for they shall have their fill." Jesus Christ
 

Offline Philip G.

  • Feldwebel
  • ***
  • Posts: 1503
  • Thanked: 617 times
  • Ordinary Cult
  • Religion: Catholic
Re: Jesus' birth was not a phantasm
« Reply #23 on: November 29, 2021, 12:59:11 PM »

    No.  Mary didn't die.

https://taylormarshall.com/2013/08/did-the-virgin-mary-die.html

"Venerable to us, O Lord, is the festivity of this day on which the holy Mother of God suffered temporal death, but still could not be kept down by the bonds of death, who has begotten your Son our Lord incarnate from herself.”

There is already another topic I started specifically on that subject.  However, I don't let a good crisis go to waste.

https://www.suscipedomine.com/forum/index.php?topic=22806.0

For the stone shall cry out of the wall; and the timber that is between the joints of the building, shall answer.  Woe to him that buildeth a town with blood, and prepareth a city by iniquity. - Habacuc 2,11-12