Posted on 01/11/2012 7:34:56 PM PST by 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.
Catholics do not worship Mary. Catholics love Mary. Catholics worship Christ alone and in a very special way in the mass.
Ishtar and Semiaramis are one and the same? Well, the briefest “biography” of each bear little resemblance to each other. But then Semiaramis doesn’t get you any closer to what you said about the Virgin Mother of God, either, since
1. Zoroaster, Semiaramis’ son, is not a God, so she certainly was never called, “Mother of God.”
2. Semiaramis is unrelated to Tammuz or Nimrod.
3. You seem to confuse “virgin birth” with “asexual reproduction.” I’m totally unaware of this passage you cite about avoiding being stoned to death for having a child after Nimrod’s death, aside from Googling it and finding other anti-Catholic websites. But since she had Zoroaster by her husband while her husband was alive, she certainly could attempt no ruse at being a virgin.
You’re apparently reading material from sources who just make up anti-Catholic fairy tales. You haven’t written one sentence which corresponds to anything about Semiaramis, Tammuz, Nimrod or Ashtarte. Nor are you explaining your deviances from mainstream sources; you’re just adding further, nonsensical statements which offer no explanation.
(To be clear, Wikipedia does reference Hislop, your apparent ultimate source, but only parenthetically, and with no bearing to any of its other information.)
You might need to get your memory tested.
I showed you that Elizabeth called Mary the Motehr of her Lord. I showed you that God is Called the Lord. I even showed in anotehr psot Thiomas referring to Jesus as "My Lord and my God.
That’s exactly what Catholics do when they ask Mary to do something for them.
I am sorry you are not allowed to pray for D-fendr or amnyone else for that matter, according to you (Completely miguided) interpretation of scripture, there is only one mediator between God and man and you are not Jesus.
I do believe you have tapped into Catholic theology!
there in lies the difference between us -
Christians believe if you die “ in Christ” your soul is in heaven with the Lord. God is not the God of the dead but the living.
Actually all you are doing is showing that you can't construct a valid syllogism.
You forget it’s both Catholics and Mormons who believe men will become gods.
John 8:44
New International Version (NIV)
44 You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father’s desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies
Now, why would Elizabeth call Mary the "mother of my Lord"? Because Elisabeth was filled with the Holy Ghost. The Holy Spirit revealed that to Elizabeth. And why would that be? Perhaps because their son, John, had been chosen by God to reveal Jesus as the Christ at His baptism. To prepare the way of the Lord, and make his paths straight.
Riiiiigggghhhhtttt.
>>Catholics love Mary. Catholics worship Christ alone and in a very special way in the mass.<<
Colossians 3:5 Mortify therefore your members which are upon the earth; fornication, uncleanness, inordinate affection, evil concupiscence, and covetousness, which is idolatry:
>> “If one would get down on their knees and pray the Rosary, one would understand.” <<
.
Yes, hellfire after the white throne judgement with the rest of the pagans!
Pray FOR or pray TO? Honestly, your post reeks of ignorance of prayer. Don’t you feel at least a little ridiculous for that show of “duh”?
Jesus struggled under the weight of the cross, I would imagine Shaq could have carried it more easily. Here, I think it would be accurate to say Shaq would have been stronger than God, likely taller as well. Unless you don’t agree with the premises above. I’m not sure who would have felt pain less or fear less than God in the garden. We remember that He sweated blood. Likely there were faster runners than God also.
It is central to Christian theology that God choose to become flesh and walk among us with all that entails. Dust could choke, thirst, hunger were real in the desert, temptation was tempting. All of this is important to understand what God Incarnate means.
I’m not sure, but I believe it would be correct to say this was a choice of God’s, to have human strength, the human limitations of body, weaker than some, stronger than others, just like all humans. Just as God chose to incarnate and have a human mother.
>> “ You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father’s desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies” <<
.
Those words were spoken by Christ to those that followed Oral Traditions, rather than the scriptures!
Jesus’ human body did not exist until His conception, but He reigns in that body at the right hand of the Father since His ascension.
That the body was transformed is doubtlessly true, but that it was not longer human is error.
Scripture never says that the glorified body of Jesus is no longer human. It doesn’t even say that it was glorified. In fact the only thing Scripture says is that He came into a locked room and St. Thomas touched Him where He was wounded in His hands and side. We also know that He ate with the Apostles.
“And He said to them, “Why are you troubled, and why do doubts arise in your hearts? 39 “See My hands and My feet, that it is I Myself; touch Me and see, for a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see that I have,” (Luke 24:38-39).
Why the sarcasm?
Catholic affection for Mary is the same as anyone’s affection for their mother. In other words, it is not inordinate affection. Inordinate simply means disordered, it most likely refers to homosexual (disordered) affection - it has nothing to do with Catholics loving Mary as they would their own mother or close relative.
and He spoke it to those that say the Church teaches men will become god.
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.