chrisy
Well-known member
How come none of my questions have been answered posted on 4th nov.??????
Human Clone
- Thread starter HerefordSire
- Start date
Jalopy
Well-known member
While I am not a great philosopher, I am enjoying this discussion.
Chrissy as for your question is cloning not immaculate conception? I would offer the opinion that no it is not due too the definition of the two words. 1.-Immaculate- meaning pure and/or unblemished. It could be pure science or pure fiction but it is not in my mind pure in a spiritual way. 2.- Conception, cloning is not conception in a biological manner nor do I think in a spiritual manner.
Granted these are my opinions and I reserve the right to change my opinion but as of now this is the reasoning for my opinions.
Chrissy as for your question is cloning not immaculate conception? I would offer the opinion that no it is not due too the definition of the two words. 1.-Immaculate- meaning pure and/or unblemished. It could be pure science or pure fiction but it is not in my mind pure in a spiritual way. 2.- Conception, cloning is not conception in a biological manner nor do I think in a spiritual manner.
Granted these are my opinions and I reserve the right to change my opinion but as of now this is the reasoning for my opinions.
larryshoat
Well-known member
All this implies that man has invented something that God could not have forseen. There has only be one immaculate conception , there will only ever be one immaculate conception.
Larry
Larry
larryshoat
Well-known member
Jalopy":hegyue8f said:
Good post JLP :tiphat: .
Larry
HerefordSire
Well-known member
larryshoat":18zbu318 said:
That is not true Larry if you believe in Adam (or whomever was the first ensouled human). Adam was an immaculate conception if he existed. There is a possibility that Eve was also an immaculate conception if she existed.
HerefordSire
Well-known member
chrisy":3cfs9eju said:
Very good questions chrisy!
I believe a clone did come from an egg and sperm, indirectly from the source genetic material, and this is the difference you are looking for. Therefore, the parent and sibling bondings for the clone would be the same as the source.
alacattleman
Well-known member
sounds like clone souls should be the least of your worriesHerefordSire":1h3y2ft3 said:
HerefordSire
Well-known member
alacattleman":1wnhhtws said:
It is important to understand that the bible coorelations of Adam and Jesus are very similar. Jesus has been known to be referred to as the new Adam. It is the main difference in the new and old testaments. The exception would be, Jesus corrects Adam's fall, which is why sin can now be forgiven.
alacattleman
Well-known member
[i]It is important to understand that the bible coorelations of Adam and Jesus are very similar. Jesus has been known to be referred to as the new Adam. It is the main difference in the new and old testaments. The exception would be, Jesus corrects Adam's fall, which is why sin can now be forgiven.[/i][/quote]...... its also important to believe they existed. ''ground zero'' a agnostic is harder too reason with than a athiest,,a athiest atleast believes something
TexasBred
Well-known member
HerefordSire":wsohez86 said:
Jesus was not the immaculate conception. Mary's conception was the immaculate conception.
alacattleman
Well-known member
well why do we have too worry about sin are even forgiveness from it if Adam didnt exsist so he couldnt fall,, then JESUS life was all in vain...angie":26nnn4t7 said:
TexasBred
Well-known member
HerefordSire":24458u1x said:
HS...Adam was no conception at all. He was a "creation" and God breathed life into him. Jesus on the other hand was "begotten, not made".
HerefordSire
Well-known member
TexasBred":1pcdykpd said:
Both were conceived without sex and were not believed to be clones, hence, immaculate conceptions. Mary was a virgin. Eve wasn't a clone because she was of the opposite sex.
I see what you mean TB since One was carried in a womb and the Other was not. I am thinking....
HerefordSire
Well-known member
Conception was a bad word to use....
Both were immaculate and perfect (without sin) initially, but both were not carried in the womb. Conception is an idea (or truth) in addition to life conception, so I could still be correct in saying both were the result of an immaculate conception.
Both were immaculate and perfect (without sin) initially, but both were not carried in the womb. Conception is an idea (or truth) in addition to life conception, so I could still be correct in saying both were the result of an immaculate conception.
HerefordSire
Well-known member
angie":3me3qwm4 said:
Good point Bammy!
alacattleman
Well-known member
im out toangie":3um66cig said:
TexasBred
Well-known member
HerefordSire":flogmz6x said:
I'll copy and paste what the catechism teaches anyway:
The term conception does not mean the active or generative conception by her parents. Her body was formed in the womb of the mother, and the father had the usual share in its formation. The question does not concern the immaculateness of the generative activity of her parents. Neither does it concern the passive conception absolutely and simply (conceptio seminis carnis, inchoata), which, according to the order of nature, precedes the infusion of the rational soul. The person is truly conceived when the soul is created and infused into the body. Mary was preserved exempt from all stain of original sin at the first moment of her animation, and sanctifying grace was given to her before sin could have taken effect in her soul.
"...was preserved exempt from all stain of original sin..."
The formal active essence of original sin was not removed from her soul, as it is removed from others by baptism; it was excluded, it never was in her soul. Simultaneously with the exclusion of sin. The state of original sanctity, innocence, and justice, as opposed to original sin, was conferred upon her, by which gift every stain and fault, all depraved emotions, passions, and debilities, essentially pertaining to original sin, were excluded. But she was not made exempt from the temporal penalties of Adam — from sorrow, bodily infirmities, and death.
"...by a singular privilege and grace granted by God, in view of the merits of Jesus Christ, the Saviour of the human race."
The immunity from original sin was given to Mary by a singular exemption from a universal law through the same merits of Christ, by which other men are cleansed from sin by baptism. Mary needed the redeeming Saviour to obtain this exemption, and to be delivered from the universal necessity and debt (debitum) of being subject to original sin. The person of Mary, in consequence of her origin from Adam, should have been subject to sin, but, being the new Eve who was to be the mother of the new Adam, she was, by the eternal counsel of God and by the merits of Christ, withdrawn from the general law of original sin. Her redemption was the very masterpiece of Christ's redeeming wisdom. He is a greater redeemer who pays the debt that it may not be incurred than he who pays after it has fallen on the debtor.
Such is the meaning of the term "Immaculate Conception."
AngusLimoX
Well-known member
TexasBred":2u2q3cx4 said:
Actually it isn't as complicated as you laid out there, it happens all the time in high schools and sometimes dirty toilet seats are blamed. :lol:
