Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies.
Locked on 10/13/2013 3:40:25 PM PDT by Religion Moderator, reason:

Poster’s request



Skip to comments.

Mary, Mother of God
http://www.catholic.com ^ | October 12, 2013 | Tim Staples

Posted on 10/12/2013 9:34:46 AM PDT by NKP_Vet

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 241-248 next last
To: Mrs. Don-o

“I’m not seeing how you could disagree with that.”

I only disagree with giving Mary, that faithful woman, a title that God Himself never gives her. He Himself praises her in many ways, but that is not something He ever says or inspires in His Word.


21 posted on 10/12/2013 12:32:54 PM PDT by aMorePerfectUnion (I grew up in America. I now live in the United States..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: aMorePerfectUnion
In an early chapter of Luke, Elizabeth calls Mary "Mother of My Lord."

The word "Lord" is used in a number of different ways in Scripture, but in this instance Elizabeth is NOT using "Lord" to mean her husband, or a member of the aristocracy, or a landowner. She is using it as it applies to Jesus in His true dignity, as St. Thomas said, "My Lord and My God."

This is not just a title, but a reality. It's not like a polite term of address what was fetched out of thin air. It comes from the Gospel, as you can see.

22 posted on 10/12/2013 1:07:27 PM PDT by Mrs. Don-o ("And who am I, that the morther of My Lord should come to me?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Rashputin

The difference is that if I am committing idolatry or in danger of dong so I do want to be corrected for it. The fool hears not reproof, not unlike the supposedly infallible but truly indefensible positions being promoted in the name of Mary and the Church.

“as preached and taught by those who who pretend the anti-Christ, anti-Chistian, Pharisee Approved Luther Subset of Scripture is the complete Bible and by doing so assert that while the Holy Spirit cannot and did not protect the Word of God”

Catholics don’t generally use the Bible to defend Catholic doctrine, as I have found repeatedly here. Occasionally they use it as a springboard but never build their arguments around its authority because they always come back to the Catholic church being a higher authority than the Bible. The Bible itself declares there are people who add to and take away from scripture. If the Catholic church was the means of preserving God’s written word, then the church would not have maintained two sets of books so to speak.

By protecting God’s word, do you mean burning people at the stake like William Tyndale because the Catholic church was protecting people from learning the scriptures in their own language? Did the Catholic church try to stop that simply because it was the wrong time? And is now it okay that the Catholic church has an English version of the Bible which had nothing to do with Tyndale and other heretics seeing the need for the common man to be able to learn God’s word in their own language? Please tell me. I am trying to comprehend.

Tyndale was a pharisee so the Catholic church had to burn him a the stake just like Jesus taught and showed in the way He treated Pharisees, right? Just like Jesus did to Nicodemus and Paul, who were Pharisees, right?

And I should not be offended that the Catholic church burned Tyndale and many other heretics at the stake and never acknowledged and repented of this as sin, right?

How many hail Mary’s does it take to atone for burning people at the stake anyway?

By “Pharisee Approved Luther Subset of Scripture is the complete Bible” do you mean Textus Receptus (the received text) as opposed to the single non-contradictory text preserved by the Catholic church? Which ONE would that be? The Latin Vulgate? Codex Vaticanus? Codex Sinaiticus? Codex Alexandrinus?

So I am an idolater BECAUSE I will not bow to Rome or Mary?
I thought I had heard all the arguments before, but that is new.


23 posted on 10/12/2013 1:12:30 PM PDT by unlearner (You will never come to know that which you do not know until you first know that you do not know it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Rashputin; All

“I know a lot of Fundamentalists, and the fact that the words “Mother of God” does not appear in the bible is no reason to lie and accuse others of “Mary worship””


On the other hand, the fact that you guys bow before her altar, offer incense to her statues, and pray to her, and exalt her as a spotless, sinless human being who can save you from your sins, is no reason to deny that you don’t worship Mary, and doesn’t give you the right to accuse others of lying about what you do.


24 posted on 10/12/2013 1:23:12 PM PDT by Greetings_Puny_Humans (If anyone tells you it's a cookbook, don't believe them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: NKP_Vet

God must be thrilled to see all his Christan followers constantly infighting in his name. Good going folks. Keep it up.


25 posted on 10/12/2013 2:13:47 PM PDT by Freedom_Is_Not_Free (Free goodies for all -- Freedom for none.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o
MDO,

Elizabeth likely recognized Mary's baby as the promised Messiah. Jews did not believe Messiah would be God - still don't. For this reason, TC's commentary rightly says, "the Bible never ascribes the title "Mother of God" to Mary." It's earliest usage appears to be from Origen in about 250 AD.

By “Lord” Elizabeth meant Jesus, not the entire Godhead. Jesus is God, but not all of God is Jesus. Consequently the Bible never ascribes the title “Mother of God” to Mary. She was the mother of Jesus, who was Elizabeth’s Lord, since He was God. This usage does not necessarily imply that the person using it believed that Jesus was God. Elizabeth apparently meant that Jesus was the Messiah at least. Luke evidently used the term “Lord” frequently because for Greek readers “Christ” or “Messiah” had little meaning. The pagan Gentiles referred to Caesar as “Lord” Caesar meaning that he was their divine sovereign. “Lord” had the same connotation for Luke’s original readers. Jesus is the divine sovereign for Christians. - TC

26 posted on 10/12/2013 2:24:45 PM PDT by aMorePerfectUnion (I grew up in America. I now live in the United States..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o

... to be complete.

Your second example of Thomas’ statement “My Lord and My God.”

He is saying Master (Messiah) and God. Never ascribed to Mary. Jesus Christ, you bet!


27 posted on 10/12/2013 2:28:28 PM PDT by aMorePerfectUnion (I grew up in America. I now live in the United States..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: GeronL
In Scripture, the Holy Spirit calls her *mother of Jesus*.

John 2:1 On the third day there was a wedding at Cana in Galilee, and the mother of Jesus was there.

John 2:3 When the wine ran out, the mother of Jesus said to him, “They have no wine.”

Acts 1:14 All these with one accord were devoting themselves to prayer, together with the women and Mary the mother of Jesus, and his brothers.

Scripture is clear in calling her *mother of Jesus* not *mother of God*.

Holy Spirit - 3

Catholic church - 0

28 posted on 10/12/2013 2:29:45 PM PDT by metmom ( ...fixing our eyes on Jesus, the Author and Perfecter of faith....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Charles Henrickson
That is not ascribing any divinity to her; it is a confession about her son, our Lord Jesus Christ.

That's a bunch of hogwash because it focuses the attention on Mary, not Jesus.

It confers divinity to her, it does not correct doctrine about Jesus.

29 posted on 10/12/2013 2:31:21 PM PDT by metmom ( ...fixing our eyes on Jesus, the Author and Perfecter of faith....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o
I'm not seeing how you could disagree with that.

Because the Holy Spirit calls her mother of Jesus.

30 posted on 10/12/2013 2:33:16 PM PDT by metmom ( ...fixing our eyes on Jesus, the Author and Perfecter of faith....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: NKP_Vet; alphadog; infool7; Heart-Rest; HoosierDammit; red irish; fastrock; NorthernCrunchyCon; ...

My soul magnifies the Lord,
And my spirit rejoices in God my Savior.
For He has regarded the low estate of His handmaiden,
For behold, henceforth all generations shall call me blessed.
For He who is mighty has done great things for me, and holy is His name. And His mercy is on those who fear Him from generation to generation.
He has shown strength with His arm:
He has scattered the proud in the imagination of their hearts.
He has put down the mighty from their thrones,
and exalted those of low degree.
He has filled the hungry with good things;
and the rich He has sent empty away.
He has helped His servant Israel, in remembrance of His mercy;
As He spoke to our fathers, to Abraham and to His posterity forever.

Glory be to the Father and to the Son and to the Holy Spirit.
As it was in the beginning, is now and ever shall be, world without end. Amen

Magníficat ánima mea Dóminum,
et exsultávit spíritus meus
in Deo salvatóre meo,
quia respéxit humilitátem
ancíllæ suæ.

Ecce enim ex hoc beátam
me dicent omnes generatiónes,
quia fecit mihi magna,
qui potens est,
et sanctum nomen eius,
et misericórdia eius in progénies
et progénies timéntibus eum.
Fecit poténtiam in bráchio suo,
dispérsit supérbos mente cordis sui;
depósuit poténtes de sede
et exaltávit húmiles.
Esuriéntes implévit bonis
et dívites dimísit inánes.
Suscépit Ísrael púerum suum,
recordátus misericórdiæ,
sicut locútus est ad patres nostros,
Ábraham et sémini eius in sæcula.

Glória Patri et Fílio
et Spirítui Sancto.
Sicut erat in princípio,
et nunc et semper,
et in sæcula sæculórum.

Amen.

She became the Mother of God, in which work so many and such great good things are bestowed on her as pass man’s understanding. For on this there follows all honor, all blessedness, and her unique place in the whole of mankind, among which she has no equal, namely, that she had a child by the Father in heaven, and such a Child . . . Hence men have crowded all her glory into a single word, calling her the Mother of God . . . None can say of her nor announce to her greater things, even though he had as many tongues as the earth possesses flowers and blades of grass: the sky, stars; and the sea, grains of sand. It needs to be pondered in the heart what it means to be the Mother of God.

(Commentary on the Magnificat, 1521; in Luther’s Works, Pelikan et al, vol. 21, 326)


31 posted on 10/12/2013 2:54:17 PM PDT by narses (... unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life within you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bryanw92
Straw man argument. I know a lot of Fundamentalists, and the fact that the words “Mother of God” does not appear in the bible is not the reason they disagree with Mary worship....oops, I mean “veneration”.
Is it English that troubles you, or logic?
The most common objection I get to Mary as Mother of God, especially from Fundamentalists, but not limited to them, is, “The words ‘Mother of God’ are nowhere to be found in the Bible. Therefore, I will not accept it as true.”
How is that a "strawman"?
32 posted on 10/12/2013 2:55:53 PM PDT by narses (... unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life within you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: aMorePerfectUnion

Clarification: who’s TC?


33 posted on 10/12/2013 3:11:09 PM PDT by Mrs. Don-o (Habemus Papam.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: aMorePerfectUnion
" She was the mother of Jesus, who was Elizabeth’s Lord, since He was God."

Now that's my point exactly. Even if the exact phrase "Mother of God" (or more probably "Theotokos") was not used until 250 AD as far as we know, it's a restating, and a logical corollary, of what was already stated by Elizabeth, and even by the Angel Gabriel.

One can use a phrase that isn't ever used in the Holy Bible. "The Holy Bible", for instance is not found in the Bible. "My personal Savior" is never found in the Bible. "The Blessed Trinity" is never found in the Bible. These are certainly, however, Biblically based truths. Same as "Mother of God."

< The real point here is that one is a mother of a person, not of a nature. Jesus has two natures (Divine and human) but is only one Person --- a Divine Person, who existed from before all ages of ages, co-eternal with the Father and the Holy Spirit. His mother --- which is to say, the one who gave him birth --- not "gave Him existence," but "gave Him birth"--- in that stable in Bethlehem--- was Mary.

Hence she is the Theotokos, the Birth-giver, of Him who existed for all eternity before she did.

34 posted on 10/12/2013 3:20:47 PM PDT by Mrs. Don-o ("Virgo Dei Genitrix, quem totus non capit orbis, In tua se clausit viscera factus homo.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: aMorePerfectUnion
"Your second example of Thomas’ statement “My Lord and My God.” He is saying Master (Messiah) and God. Never ascribed to Mary. Jesus Christ, you bet!"

Amen. Total agreement here.

35 posted on 10/12/2013 3:22:03 PM PDT by Mrs. Don-o ("Virgo Dei Genitrix, quem totus non capit orbis, In tua se clausit viscera factus homo.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o; aMorePerfectUnion

The problem isn’t so much the phrase “Mother of God,” since, even though it has no basis in the scripture, people saying it can understand it as meaning the mother of Jesus, and not of His divinity. However, the problem with the way the RCC uses it, is they, in practice, make her the mother of His deity too, and thus put the Mother on equal grounds with the son; nay, perhaps on a superior level, since she is able to save people from His wrath, who He Himself would not have saved unless she stepped in and placated His anger. Thus the RCC use the term to prop up their idolatry.


36 posted on 10/12/2013 3:27:25 PM PDT by Greetings_Puny_Humans (If anyone tells you it's a cookbook, don't believe them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: metmom
Yes, and Jesus is God.

And around we go!

I mean, when we say "Jesus," how many people are we talking about here? Are Jesus and God two people? Jesus is God, One Person, One Divine Person, one of the Trinity, existing before time even existed, co-eternal with the Father and the Holy Spirit.

At a point in time, approx 2000 year ago, He was born in Bethlehem. Who gave this Person birth? Mary. She conceived and gave birth to a person. She did not make Him, or create Him, or originate Him. She birthed Him.

Would I make it a little clearer if I called her the "birthmother"? I'm sure you wouldn't deny that. I don't think any Christian could.

37 posted on 10/12/2013 3:28:55 PM PDT by Mrs. Don-o ("Virgo Dei Genitrix, quem totus non capit orbis, In tua se clausit viscera factus homo.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Freedom_Is_Not_Free

Is that to say you no like-ee this latest of a long line of holy hand grenade, threads of the day?

38 posted on 10/12/2013 3:33:46 PM PDT by BlueDragon (one of three...some days...one of a dozen or more...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: unlearner

That was excellent!


39 posted on 10/12/2013 3:38:03 PM PDT by CynicalBear (For I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: All

I don’t get why some of you bother. Elizabeth called her the “mother of her Lord” in the Bible. The Bible is (supposedly) inspired by God. Therefore God Himself has called her the Mother of the Lord (aka Mother of God).

Really, this is simple folks.


40 posted on 10/12/2013 3:40:45 PM PDT by piusv
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 241-248 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson