Mary: Mother of God?

What Does the Bible say? ^ | 01/11/2012 | Bro. Lev Humphries,

[RnMomof7]

Mary: Mother of God?

This article is prompted by an ad in the Parade Magazine titled: "Mary Mother of God: What All Mankind Should Know." The offer was made for a free pamphlet entitled "Mary Mother of Jesus" with this explanation: "A clear, insightful pamphlet explains the importance of Mary and her role as Mother of God."

This is quite a claim, to say the least! Nowhere in the Bible is Mary said to be the mother of God. I touched on this subject in a series on "Mary Co-Redeemer with Christ" printed recently.

Question: If Mary is the Mother of God, Who, may I ask, is the Father of God? Does God have a Father, and if He does, Who is His Mother?

The phrase "Mother of God" originated in the Council of Ephesus, in the year 431 AD. It occurs in the Creed of Chalcedon, which was adopted by the council in 451 AD. This was the declaration given at that time: "Born of the Virgin Mary, the Mother of God according to the Manhood." The purpose of this statement originally was meant to emphasize the deity of Christ over against the teaching of the Nestorians whose teaching involved a dual-natured Jesus. Their teaching was that the person born of Mary was only a man who was then indwelt by God. The title "Mother of God" was used originally to counter this false doctrine. The doctrine now emphasizes the person of Mary rather than the deity of Jesus as God incarnate. Mary certainly did not give birth to God. In fact, Mary did not give birth to the divinity of Christ. Mary only gave birth to the humanity of Jesus. The only thing Jesus got from Mary was a body. Every Human Being has received a sinful nature from their parents with one exception: Jesus was not human. He was divine God in a flesh body. This is what Mary gave birth to. Read Hebrews 10:5 and Phil 2:5-11.

Please refer to Hebrews 10:5 where we see. "...Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me."

The body of Jesus was prepared by God. In Matthew 1:18, "she was found with child of the Holy Ghost."

The divine nature of Jesus existed from before eternity, and this cannot be said of Mary Jesus never called her "mother". He called her "woman".

This doctrine deifies Mary and humanizes Jesus. Mary is presented as stronger that Christ, more mature and more powerful that Christ. Listen to this statement by Rome: "He came to us through Mary, and we must go to Him through her." The Bible plainly states that God is the Creator of all things. It is a blasphemous attack on the eternity of God to ever teach that He has a mother. Mary had other children who were normal, physical, sinful human beings. In the case of Jesus Christ, "His human nature had no father and His divine nature had no mother."

It is probably no coincidence that this false doctrine surrounding Mary was born in Ephesus. Please read Acts 19:11-41 and see that Ephesus had a problem with goddess worship. Her name was Diana, Gk. Artemis. You will not have to study very deep to find the similarities between the goddess Diana and the Roman Catholic goddess, Mary. It should be noted that the Mary of the 1st century and the Mary of the 20th century are not the same. Mary of the 1st century was the virgin who gave birth to the Messiah. Mary of the 20th century is a goddess created by the Roman Catholic Church. A simple comparison of what the Bible teaches about Mary and what the Roman Catholic Church teaches about her will reveal two different Marys. Mary is not the "Mother of God." If she were she would be GOD! There is only one true, eternal God. He was not born of a woman. Any teaching on any subject should be backed up by the word of God. If it cannot be supported by Scriptures, it is false doctrine.

[aruanan]

....while Roman Catholic apologist often attack evangelicals based upon their reliance upon fallible human reasoning, however prayerful — an infirmity which the supreme magisterium of Rome asserts they are immune from when speaking in accordance with their infallibly-defined criteria — .....yet the Catholic himself makes a fallible decision to submit to Rome,..... which use of 'fallible human reasoning' he also engages in when interpreting what Rome has taught, including which teachings are indeed infallible in which was are not,.... in which he cannot be absolutely sure.

And here's the truly funny thing: Person A believes that Person B, because of his position in an apostolic succession going back to Jesus and his charge to his apostles, can speak infallibly on matters of faith and doctrine (though it's happened only twice since the 19th century). Person C scoffs and says that's an example of "fallible human reasoning" while granting to himself, supposedly through the guidance of God's Spirit that he denies to Person B, an interpretation of both scripture and God's will that he, Person C, regards to be at least if not more accurate than that promulgated by Person B and believed by Person A. Just who is being the more credulous?

[MarkBsnr]

someone doesn’t like talking about the “prophetess” and her teaching Jesus was a created being Michael the archangel.

When one's purpose is to be antiCatholic, then nothing else matters.

Mark, you are right, i don’t care. As far as Mary goes, we call her Blessed and the unbelievers call her Ishtar.

When your only high point in life is to name your own salvation, nothing else matters, even reality.

[caww]

the deification of Mary is a whole different kind of sacrilege where God's word implies the penalty is far more severe.

I have great concerns for those who get "caught up" in this Maryology...even in the least bit. It always appears to lead people away from Christ and she becomes central...if He is spoken of it's generally after the fact as if speaking His name sanctions these acts of worhip, or adoration, or what ever they choose to call it.

It is noteworthy that even in discussions about statues, shrines etc. Jesus is rarely mentioned if at all...it's as if He's the decorative ornament on the entity they are speaking of, with, or attempting to engage people with.

[one Lord one faith one baptism]

i can always tell those that follow EGW and her heretical teachings:

THEY HATE THE CHURCH WITH A PASSION.

that’s ok, the devil has been trying to destroy the Church for 2,000 years, unfortunately, the Holy Spirit won’t let him!

[MarkBsnr]

Hello, good Dr. E. I missed the antiCatholic venom of which flavours the RF with such permeation.

Your little unattributed polemic (not surprising) does not jive with the vast writings of the Reformers. Shall I provide quotes?

[caww]

A man of knowledge uses words with restraint and a man of understanding is even-tempered. Even a fool is thought wise if he keeps silent, and discerning if he holds his tongue.

[MarkBsnr]

A man of knowledge uses words with restraint and a man of understanding is even-tempered. Even a fool is thought wise if he keeps silent, and discerning if he holds his tongue.

You post words of wisdom. I however have been wronged and lies posted about me are unacknowleged and treated as truth. Therefore I shall continue until said idiot confesses it in the same public fashion that he posted initially.

[CynicalBear]

>>To say that the Church replaced Israel is wrong, and the Church does not say that.<<

Take that up with the CC and what it actually teaches.

877 Likewise, it belongs to the sacramental nature of ecclesial ministry that it have a collegial character. In fact, from the beginning of his ministry, the Lord Jesus instituted the Twelve as "the seeds of the new Israel and the beginning of the sacred hierarchy." Chosen together, they were also sent out together, and their fraternal unity would be at the service of the fraternal communion of all the faithful: they would reflect and witness to the communion of the divine persons. For this reason every bishop exercises his ministry from within the episcopal college, in communion with the bishop of Rome, the successor of St. Peter and head of the college. So also priests exercise their ministry from within the presbyterium of the diocese, under the direction of their bishop. [http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/para/877.htm]

Just as the Old Testament is full of foreshadows of the New Testament (typology), Catholics believe the Bible is clear that the New Jerusalem of the Book of Revelation is not the historic city of Jerusalem. We do not believe that present day Israel is the same spiritual entity as the historic Israel before the time of Christ. After the crucifixion, the curtain of the Jewish sanctuary was torn in two (Mk 15:37-39, Lk 23:44-46, Mt 27:51) which was God tearing his cloths. At that point, a transfer of authority happened and we believe that the fledgling Church became the New Israel. [http://www.davidmacd.com/catholic/why_did_the_catholic_church_move_to_rome_from_jerusalem.htm]

“became the new Israel” is NOT saying they “joined” Israel.

[CynicalBear]

>>That is why the woman in Genesis and in Revelation can be Mary, Israel and the Church as all three fulfill all or some of what is written.<<

Only if you force something into it and ignore the rest of scripture that applies.

[caww]

As far as Mary goes, we call her Blessed and the unbelievers call her Ishtar.

Unbelievers don't care one way or another what you call her. But Christians call her Mary....catholicism calls her:

Queen of angels,...Queen of prophets,...Queen of apostles,...Queen of martyrs,...Queen of confessors,...Queen of virgins,....Queen of all saints,....Queen conceived without original sin,...Queen assumed into heaven,....Queen of the most holy Rosary,.....Queen of families....Queen of peace.

Seat of wisdom,......Cause of our joy,....Spiritual vessel,....Vessel of honor....Singular vessel of devotion....Mystical Rose, ...............................

Tower of David,.....Tower of ivory,.....House of gold,.....Ark of the covenant,......Gate of heaven,..... Morning star,......................

Health of the sick, Refuge of sinners, Comforter of the afflicted................

Virgin most venerable, Virgin most renowned, Virgin most powerful, Virgin most merciful, Virgin most faithful,........................

Holy Mother of God, Holy Virgin of virgins Mother of the Church Mother of divine grace Mother most pure, Mother most chaste, Mother inviolate, Mother undefiled, Mother most amiable, Mother most admirable, Mother of good counsel, Mother of our Creator,......................

Just to name a few titles. MAny of which are exclusively Christ's and His alone...and some dare say she is not worshipped?????

[caww]

...but a prudent man overlooks an insult.

[one Lord one faith one baptism]

“Just to name a few titles. MAny of which are exclusively Christ’s and His alone...and some dare say she is not worshipped????? “

isn’t it interesting that only non-Catholics say Catholics worship Mary?

no Catholic would or ever could worship Mary and every Catholic knows this.

now, if Mary really was supposed to be worshipped according to Catholic doctrine and Catholics deny worshipping her, wouldn’t they be sinning?

for example, Catholic doctrine days the Trinity ( Father, Son and Holy Spirit ) alone should be worshipped. A Catholic would sinning if they denied this.

but non-Catholics understand this, it’s more fun spreading “untruths” isn’t it?

[MarkBsnr]

...but a prudent man overlooks an insult.

More truth. However, I am not always prudent...

[caww]

Try.

[MarkBsnr]

i can always tell those that follow EGW and her heretical teachings:

There is no Christianity in those that follow her. You have hit the nail right on the thumb.

[MarkBsnr]

There is no try. There is only do or not do.

I am not sure that I can do in this case.

[caww]

Most Christians don’t follow other Christians...they “try” to let Christ have His way with them....thus walking with the Lord...not with another individual....unless of course a husband or wife.

[daniel1212]

Church fathers said to be at variance with eschatology of Roman Catholicism: http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=00CAjU

[caww]

LOL......oh my gosh Mark...I was thinking of putting Yoda’s ‘do or do not’ out there but then ...well...maybe I should have.

You say you don’t think you can in this case? Well, what was that little train that said ...”I think I can, I think Ican”? So get on board!

[MarkBsnr]

Most Christians don’t follow other Christians...they “try” to let Christ have His way with them....thus walking with the Lord...not with another individual....unless of course a husband or wife.

Again, much wisdom. I understand about the relationship of a Christian wife. Mine is without parallel and God's special gift to me. She has given me five wonderful children and is the most excellent manager of finances of our household. Not only that, she looks wonderful in a bikini and even better out of it.

I have been blessed far beyond my deserving.