Posted on 08/17/2015 6:07:35 PM PDT by NKP_Vet
It is that time of week again, where we talk about the Mary, the Mother of God. This is definitely the single most important title that Mary has. If someone gets this wrong, then they get the Divinity of our Lord wrong, and that means the whole plan of Salvation is just messed up. So let us look at this most important title.
Theotokos, God-bearer in Greek, is what the council of Ephesus declared in 431. It specifically says this “If anyone does not confess that God is truly Emmanuel, and that on this account the Holy Virgin is the Mother of God (for according to the flesh she gave birth to the Word of God become flesh by birth), let him be anathema.” Now just that statement alone proves the early Church believed that there was Authority given to the bishops to decide sound doctrine, Mary was a Holy Virgin her entire life, and that She bore God. However, we only have time for one today.
Now many times we will hear non-Catholics tell us that this title is nowhere found in Scripture, explicitly at least. However, they cannot themselves find a Scripture verse that says that all doctrine and dogma must be explicitly proven in Scripture. I bet they can never find that. This is a trap they set up for themselves and it is a very unfair double standard that they expect us to meet, but they do not have to. However, on top of this double standard is if we used that same standard, then the doctrine of the Trinity is thrown out, since it’s not an explicit teaching, but instead is implicit in Scripture. This double standard seems to cause more problems that it’s worth wouldn’t you say?
Here is the cold hard truth of it though, all Christians rely on some Church Tradition, as well as Scripture, to validate their doctrines, whether they admit it or not. With that being said, Scripture and Tradition can never contradict one another. The Traditions of men can contradict the Word of God, but the Traditions God left us, through Christ, in the Holy Spirit, are binding upon us, as we are to hold fast to Traditions. So then, what is the real question? The real question is, Does Scripture contradict the teaching that Mary is the Mother of God, and is that doctrine found in Scripture at least implicitly?
Let us begin with Luke 1:43, where Mary visited Elizabeth. There Elizabeth exclaimed “Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb! And why is this granted me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?” Because Mary was the Mother of the Lord, who is the Second part of the Holy Trinity, Mary is truly and rightfully called the Mother of God.
We also see in Isaiah 7:14 “Behold a virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and they shall call His name Emmanuel, which is interpreted God with us.” Jesus is God. He was God when He was in the womb, conceived, lived, died, buried, resurrected, in the Eucharist, and in Heaven. The Messiah, who is God, was to be born of a virgin, according to Scripture. God was born of a virgin, and it’s right there in Isaiah, who prophesied of Christ birth. That means both Old and New Testament support the Catholic Doctrine of the Mother of God.
However, this may not be enough for some non-Catholics. Some say that Elisabeth called Christ Lord, and not God, saying that Mary was only to give birth to the human child, the Lord Jesus Christ. So then the question becomes, does lord here mean divinity or just authority? Let’s look at the context.
First let us look at 1 Cor. 8:5, which states “Indeed there are many gods and many lords, yet to us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things, and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist.” St. Paul makes it clear that Jesus is the one True, Lord, as opposed to all the false ones, that the pagans who converted in Corinth were probably worshiping. So then, they would understand that Jesus is God. This holds true to the Jews who converted too, who would know Deut. 6:4 “Hear, therefore, o Israel, the Lord our God is one Lord.”
So then that brings us back to Luke 1:43. Elizabeth calls Mary the mother of her Lord. The Mother…Mothers give birth to persons, not natures, let us remember that. Mary did not just give birth to the human nature of Christ, she gave birth to the person of Christ. Christ personhood is Divine, it is God the Son.
Then let us look at 2 Sam. 6:9 where the King, who was David says “How can the ark of the Lord come to me (being the ark of the covenant)” Then in 2 Samuel 616 we see King David leaping in the presence of the Ark, just as John the Baptist did. Then we yet again see another parallel, which says that the ark of the Lord abode in the house of Obededom the Gethite for three months (2 Sam. 6:11), and according to Luke 1:56 Mary remained in the house of Elizabeth about three months. Then, we see that the ark of the covenant carried three items, manna, the Ten Commandments, and Aaron’s rod. These are all types of things Christ are, the Bread of Life, Word made Flesh, and our true High Priest.
Even knowing all this though, there are still those who would deny that Mary is the Mother of God. So then we have to ask, who is Jesus Christ to them? If Mary is not the Mother of God, then who did she give birth to? Many would say it was an earthly human lord, not God. So then, what does that make Christ? If Mary did not give birth to God, then who did she give birth to? Was not Christ God when He was conceived?
If someone says Mary only gave birth to the person of Christ one of two errors, or both could happen, and that is the Denial of the divinity of Christ, and that one would have to say Christ is two distinct persons, and that he is not One. Both were considered heresy in the Early Church. Christ is one Person, with two natures, Divine and Human, which go together and are not separate of one another. If one denies that, the ultimately they are speaking about a different Christ, and St. Paul warns us about that problem, and to not to give heed to them (2 Cor. 11:4).
So then, some say that Mary is the mother of the Trinity if we take it that far, however, this is not true. Mary gave birth to the 2nd part of the Trinity, the 2nd Person, who is still God just not the Trinity. However, we must never forget that each Person in the Trinity shares the same Divine Nature and is fully God.
One thing some still point out is that Christ is eternal, so for Mary to be the Mother of God she would have to be God. However the Church does not say Mary is the source of the Divine Nature of the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity. To better understand this let’s look at humanity. Parents give birth to a person, however they are not the author of life, and certainly did not give the child it’s soul. Thus is true with Mary, she did not give Christ His Divine Nature, though she was the Mother of more than just the human form of Christ, because she gave birth to a person, who was God.
Darn I only got a cult and two cultists...I was going for three cultists.....I almost filled my card for the day too.
My apologies.
I returned evil with evil.
We know Mary was graced by becoming the mother of the baby Jesus. She was not the mother of His soul and the body of Jesus did not have life until breathed into Him by God the Father.
FWIW, the mistaken notion in theology that Mary is the Mother of God, implicitly denies the RCC doctrine of the Hypostatic Union.
Monfront. Ok a typo. Must be a huge anti catholic conspiracy.....
. Yet you ignore his quote in a deflection of the issue.
I posted the source of the quotes, which you obviously found and as you can see these are books....maybe you've heard of them.
Man the clintons would love you.
You're trying to use proposing to compare to kneeling before Mary!!! Oh man, you made my day. LOL!
You keep telling yourself you're not worshipping Mary when you kneel before her.
Later.
Actually, no. I made no mistakes at all.
“Yet you ignore his quote in a deflection of the issue.”
There was no ignoring it nor deflection. Nothing you have posted means anything for your side of the argument. You post things that prove nothing about your central claim: that Catholics worship Mary, that she is an idol, that her statues are idols that are worshiped. Seriously, you fail in every single you you put up to prove any of that.
“I posted the source of the quotes, which you obviously found and as you can see these are books....maybe you’ve heard of them.”
But the point is that you got the quote from an anti-Catholic website, right? You didn’t get it from a book, right? You never any of the books in question, correct? You don’t read, you don’t study, you don’t investigate, right? All you do is rely on anti-Catholic websites, right?
Anti-Catholics are perfectly predicable: they know little or nothing about much of anything; they read little; they rely on anti-Catholics for their information; they certainly care nothing about context; they repeatedly insist one thing is another even when it clearly is not. Example:
“You keep telling yourself you’re not worshipping Mary when you kneel before her.”
I’ve never knelt before Mary. She’s in heaven. You’re confusing an artwork that depicts her with the actual person. You’re the only one here who is doing that. Now, a person with any circumspection, with any intelligence at all, would recognize that obvious fact.
The Clintons are paging vladimir998.....please pick up on the conspiracy line.
Sincerity and believing in the Easter Bunny to bring you to God will not end up well.
Why the Easter Bunny, you ask? Because it is just as much a myth as their false religion. We can pray that hearts will be opened to the Truth, but it will only be through the Holy Spirit. Satan is undoubtably proud of his work with the Roman Catholic cult!
Black is white...
2. I disagreed with your statements.
3. By definition, your statements are "claims."
4. You said, “I make no claims.”
5. You said, "Actually, no. I made no mistakes at all."
6. You err. You are incorrect. You made mistakes. You have been wrong (and on many of more of your claims as well). You failed.
.
¡no más!
You may as well put whatever response you might think up in the bit bucket. You've already proved yourself.
You “know Jesus” because the Catholic Church gave you the Bible to “know Jesus”. Now have a nice day.
“Thank you for finally admitting that God made Mary the Mother of God.”
Nah. He made her to bear Messiah.
Jesus is not God?
Arthur,
“Are you going to continue to contradict the word of God, the gospel, the Scriptures, by refusing to call Mary “the mother of God”?”
I posted *extensively up thread on this passage, showing it means something different than you claim. Read it if you are interested. I don’t see any point in reposting it again.
In short, I won’t call dear Mary that which God never called her. Why would you take the position of superiority to God in this matter and insist others follow this error?
I am content to trust He knows exactly what He chose dear Mary to do. I never want to go down that path of idolizing this humble woman or making her into a demigoddess.
Best
“Jesus is not God?”
No reason to rehash what I already stated Arthur.
Best
I agree it is very bad to lie to children by using cartoons.
I agree it is very bad to teach children to idolize a sinful human.
I agree it is very bad to take the focus off the One who saves eternally and substitute the one who was blessed to hear Him.
So at last we agree!
Best
Are you going to continue to worship the mother goddess, even though the Bible tells you that before there was a Universe God existed, even before there was a Mary Mother of Jesus?
God's name is I AM. Therefore anything finite cannot have been the Mother of I AM. BUT, the blessed Mother of Jesus can be the Mother of the man-side of Jesus without contradicting the Bible. Why is it that your magicsteeringthem doesn't see that?
It is impossible to be Christian without Christ. Where else does one find Christ? At any rate, to what ‘Christians were you referring?
So referencing God's view of scripture as a defense of scripture is circular reasoning now? Can't help you then.
Mary cannot be the mother of the “man-side” of Jesus without being the mother of God for a very simple reason: Jesus is ONE PERSON, the Second Person of the Trinity.
The title “Mother of God” has NEVER meant that Mary is the mother of the eternal, Triune God. Objecting to the title on the grounds that Mary is a creature of God only shows that you have no idea what the title means.
Of course, what's your beef, was Paul speaking in tongues? Requiring belief in Marian doctrine for salvation is a different Gospel.
You're joking, right? Ever read the New Testament? Not one single Christian found there ever found Jesus in Scripture. The Kakure Kirishitan are another example of a community that knew Jesus without Scripture. Scripture is not an indispensable element of Christianity unless it's the idol you worship.
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.