Skip to comments.Mary: Mother of God?
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.
The slugs who routinely begin threads to repeat their lies about the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church founded by Jesus Christ as well as all Christians who do not share their bizarre heresy need to have salt poured on them. And you, my friend, are the winner of the first Salter of Anti-Catholic Heretic Slugs Award. I wish I could afford to present you with a nice porcelain "idol" for your shelf, but for now this will have to do:
Now anyone who really cares can refer back to this thread and see where the usual suspects openly admit they do not believe in the diety of Jesus Christ as it is spelled out in the Bible. God bless you and keep up the good work.
I wouldnt have it in my house nor would I attend a church that had it displayed.
I wasnt asking about what I thought about the images and statues. I asked if you would destroy them just to be on the safe side. Are you saying the risk is worth keeping and saving them?
Come on this is silly. If Mary could have said no I think it's a safe bet that there were at least 100,000 other good Jewish women who were praying that they might serve God by bringing the Messiah into the world.
Why does Mary have to be given special status and powers? Isn't it enough to just recognize she was a good woman who when given a task by God did it joyfully. Mary has nothing to do with your salvation.
You can only be saved by Jesus Christ and no one stands between you and Him. Trust in Jesus don't let this out of control cult of Mary lead you to damnation.
Be truthful, I did not write about Catholic statues but of the difference between an image and an idol using art as an example of an image that is not an idol. I also was clear to explain that to adore an image of any kind as if it were really God (as in present amongst us and taking the form of the statue or the picture) would indeed by idolatry.
Please find me one Catholic or Orthodox who treats icons as if Jesus were truly in that Icon. That He was made manifest in that icon instead of it being a means to focus our attention on the Savior and to give evidence of our affection for Him.
You won’t. Anymore than you will find us believing our families are truly present in photographs of them.
****No. No permission asked. She was told what was going to happen.
Her choice was to willingly submit or not.****
Are you saying here that God would have forced Mary to bear Jesus had she not submitted?
That is not the God I know from Scriptures. Maybe you could tell me more about this god whom you just described?
I respect you for your consistency.
I would hope that if I put anything or any person before the Lord I would realize this sin and remedy it.
Man makes idols of many things.
****Was Christ not full human?****
So, Christ died for Himself?
CB, you have just totally boggled my mind. The extent with which you must contort and deny Truth is astounding.
Christ is eternal, His sacrifice is also eternal. That God would become Incarnate for the redemption of our sins was eternally known to Him. The human Jesus did not need redemption and was not corruptible.
Perhaps you wish someday to join the muslims in destroying the art of the Church. It's been going on for centuries; it's happening today.
When that evil wind blows wherever it blows, individuals comprising their own individual churches are lost in the wind. The Church will survive as she always has. Surviving against all who try to tear her down.
Compared to the gates of hell, you're efforts here are easily laughed off.
Then he was never tempted...Bible must be wrong...
Let's see, should I risk being called an idolater based on your silly opinion. Should I join with the muslim view and destroy the art of Christiandom? Should I risk the wrath of the secular world and government by displaying the art of my faith? Should I hide it and deny it and turn my back on the Martyrs of the Church?
Or should I see and share the Beauty that is from God, the Beauty and Truth of Christ's Church as expressed in art?
Ok, I've considered it properly. Can you guess my answer?
Thank you, Rashputin. I shall carry my salt proudly and always try to use it wisely.
For the record, what I wrote was my own words and understanding of that Scripture. I did not consult the CC so your charge right there is false.
Also, I did not in any way twist Scripture, I explained my understanding of the verse you posted, within the context in which is was written.
There is nothing there regarding the making of a physical image of God. Paul is speaking of men/women who knowing the truth of God, make Him out to be nothing more than those He created.
Good grief, try reading it in context and not to suit an preformed belief.
From a Protestant Bible (NIV) Matthew 16: 17-19, ‘And Jesus answered him, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my father who is in heaven. And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church and the powers of death shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”
I didn’t say the word ‘rock’ but you knew Peter means Rock. You must know at that moment in the fullness of time Jesus Christ changed the name of Simon to Peter (rock). In the Bible, Jesus is building a Church. I recommend you find the Church established by Jesus Christ. Until 1054 AD there was basically ONE Church until the split between East & West.
The Catholic Church is aware of all the passages in the Bible as the Bible came out of the Church. When Jesus Christ ascended into Heaven, He left behind a visible Church to carry-on his work here on Earth. Jesus Christ is the Head & the Church is his Body. (Yet, we Christians are the hands & feet of Jesus doing his work.) If the Catholic Church was just a group of people, it would NOT have lasted for the last TWO THOUSAND years. God is the ‘glue’ that holds it together as the Church truly is the Body of Christ.
Your argument is NOT with me but it’s actually with God. Bless you for reading the Bible. I encourage you to keep reading the Bible. Please try & spot your Church some place in the Bible & then trace your Church through the centuries. Jesus Christ established a Church & the Gates of Hell will not prevail over it.
I keep repeating this obvious observation about the Bible. Jesus Christ did NOT walk the Holy Lands with a sack of Bibles while handing them out saying, ‘read this & argue about it.’ + Jesus did not leave us ‘totally lost’ like a motherless child. Jesus Christ gave us ‘Holy Mother Church’ that provides love & care that only comes from a Mother’s Heart. The Bible & our knowledge about Jesus Christ has come to us through a Church. I recommend you find the Church established by Jesus Christ.
Oh I have no doubt the RCC will be here until the end.
***OT Jesus showed up as an angel and took on the appearance of different men... ****
Please, point me to that in the OT.
***This ought to be clear to anyone that Jesus does not look like he did as his appearance in the flesh...****
***Nope...Jesus was not touched before his ascension...****
The gospels say otherwise...
Luke 25:39 Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.
John 20:27Then saith he to Thomas, Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side: and be not faithless, but believing.
I thought catholics weren’t allowed their own personal understanding (interpretation)?
Isn’t that the accusation you throw at “protestants”?
Color me confused.
As if to say, do not think highly of Mary because she is the person who is the Mother, but think highly of her because her soul magnifies the Lord. She heard God's voice and always obeyed without question.
i’ve read that somewhere before, where could it be?
***I thought catholics werent allowed their own personal understanding (interpretation)?***
Well, then you thought wrong. Must be due to reading the misrepresentations of the faith from the anti Catholics here.
***Color me confused.***
Not hard to do at all.