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.
**Receiving the Eucharist is a live and death matter.**
Does it wear off?
If not, why repeat the ceremony?
If it does wear off, how does one know when it has worn off?
Look throughout Acts. It’s full of conversion stories. Do you see Peter, John, Philip, or Paul administering the ‘eucharist’? Nope. Pretty slack of them, seeing how they focused on repentance, baptism in the name of Jesus, and receiving the gift of the Holy Ghost.
The Lord’s supper,...they knew it was a spiritual matter, not literal.
**If you had an understanding of the Bible**
I’m headed for bed, but your welcome to address my points, and answer my questions in #750.
**you would run to the nearest Catholic Church and convert to the One, True, Apostolic church. There is no other. Started by Christ himself 2,000 years ago.**
The proof is in the rightly divided Word. Not in some memorized catechism
John 6:63 It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh is no help at all. The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life.
The SPIRIT gives life. The FLESH is NO help at all.
Jesus' words are what we live by, not be eating Him.
But that is all they know. Their magicsteeringthem has told them they must eat the body, blood, soul, ANDDIVINITY of Jesus to have eternal life in them. Except it isn’t eternal life since they have to keep eating Him at every Mass. ... Blasphemy to the finest demonic level. ‘Having a form of godliness but denying the power thereof.’
**“Now as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed, and broke it, and gave it to the disciples and said, ‘Take, eat; this is my body.’ And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, saying, ‘Drink of it, all of you; for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.’” (Mt. 26:26-28)**
That’s great, but why stop short of verse 29?
“But I say unto you, I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father’s kingdom.”
Is he going to drink his blood in heaven? Come on now,...your church takes it literally, right?
The Lord also said that he would no more drink of this fruit of the vine
“Who are the Apostles of the Reformation”
You know John, Peter, Luke, Mark, Paul, and their/our Leader Jesus Christ. Try reading their writings and you will realize how much of a boondoggle you have fell for.
“In which year, decade, or century do you assert the RCC fell into sin and what one holy catholic apostolic church do you think replaced it ?”
From the beginning and it will get way worst in the very near future.
Revelation 2:18-29
It is often claimed the Mary was heralded by the Patristics as a woman full of grace, perhaps sinless, and deserving our veneration above other departed saints as the Mother of the Church. This is not the case. While I do freely admit that the word Patristic can be used to cover a variety of ages, I prefer to use it to the pre-nicaean leaders of the church. Let us start with them, and we can move on from there.
In the Apostolic Fathers, as the first century leaders are often called, one sees little to no mention of Mary at all. Clement of Rome leaves her out of his epistle completely. This is a glaring omission for ‘Mary full of grace’ since Clement’s entire letter is about submission, faith, and peace. Clement uses as examples of Christian living Paul, Peter, Moses, Abraham, David, and several martyrs in addition to Jesus Christ. Beyond that he even uses a few women as examples. Rahab gets the most ink as a wonderful example of faith, two women killed by Nero are mentioned, Esther get a paragraph, as does Judith from the Apocrypha. But no Mary. First century writers seem to view Mary as a good believer, but nothing more, much like Protestants today.
Second century writers turn up the first exaltation references to Mary, but even these are over stated. Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, and Tertullian all try to draw Mary as the anti-type of Eve as Jesus was of Adam. This leads to some grandiose statements about Mary, but the ancient mind often thought more typologically and allegorically then we do today. These men did not have any allusions about Mary being above sin (original or actual). In fact Irenaeus condemns Mary as a sinner for her role in the Wedding of Cana arguing that Jesus rebukes her for her presumptuous pride. Tertullian along with other second century leaders like Origen and later writers like Basil the Great and Chrysostom (4th century) all ascribe to Mary the sins of maternal vanity, anxiety, and doubt and state that the ‘sword’ that pierces Mary’s soul in Luke 2:35 are these sins. Hardly a high view of Mary despite their typological attempts.
“You do assemble regularly in a faith community, correct”
You always do this you really need to get more deflection questions, lol.
Just as the RCC isn’t Scriptural neither is OSAS.
So you only obey nine Commandments? Or are there other Commandments that also inconvenience y'all?
So you are under the law of sin and death ... good luck with that. Jesus covered that with His Precious, sinless, real blood, so that we read ‘there is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh but after the spirit.’ Try it! You’ll like it!
You need to read the article. “Do this IN REMEMBRANCE of Me”, is contained in Luke 22:19-20.
“Receiving the Eucharist is a live and death matter”.
“Then the Jews began to argue with one another, saying, “How can this man give us His flesh to eat?” 53So Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in yourselves. 54”He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.” ~ John 6:52-54
It appears to me, that you enjoy freedom in Christ. 😱 Do you think that someone, somewhere, at sometime, is cringing at the thought? 🙀😱. Oh, the horror of horrors. 😆
yes, we are well aware that catholiciism teaches cannibalism as a means to get god-life into the adherents. But to do so the religion of catholiciism must ignore all the rest of scripture or twist it out of context to defend the violation of the laws as given in Leviticus. So, when Jesus said the cup held wine, was He just mistaken? You fine young cannibals are the ones who need to ‘read the article’ ... Paganism is hallmarked by eating the pagan god to get the pagan’s god’s life in the pagans. Have at it ... remain steadfast in your cannibalism and ignore Leviticus.
When Jesus said, “This is My Body ... this is My blood.” He meant exactly what He said. Many apostles ran away. They were scared. They had no faith in the Lord. You don’t think they took him at his word? Of courses they did, that’s why they left him. They thought he was crazy. Jesus flatly said the bread and the wine were His body; He meant it. The minute he said this they became his body and blood. The ones that believed him stayed. “He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day”. The ones with no faith took off and certainly will not be raised up on the last day. Jesus told us exactly what to do, AND ALL CHRISTIANS took Him at His word until 500 years ago when heretic broke His Church apart.
To this very day there are millions more Christians that still believe Him 2,000 years after He said these words, than those that ignore His Commandment. Fallen away Catholics are exactly like those that took off because they had no faith in Him.
You are so presuming in your assuming. So you assumed that since I did not as you called for that i did not care, and now assume i am not one of the Protestants that believed in the major historical doctrines of Christianity?
It is occurring right under your nose, so to speak. Why do you not comment on, and correct, your fellow Protestants' doctrinal errors ? This is the Achilles' Heel of the Protestants.
I have over 130 tabs open, and many documents, and other things needing attention, including moving thousands off files over to another PC, and do not have the warrant and energy to go thru all that has been posted on this 800 post thread.
You took the initiative to post to me, and i am responding to what you are saying.
Do you believe that Jesus Christ is God the Son, and not just the Son of God (that is a yes or no question BTW) ? If so, why do you not correct them ?
Did you not see the link i provided affirming Jesus Christ is God the Son? Shall i assume you do not care?
As for the latter, you seem to be keeping records, so show me all those who deny this, and not just based on what you read out of rejecting the title MOG which does not equate to denying Divinity of the Son.
But the law is not of faith, rather “The one who does them shall live by them.” Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us—for it is written, “Cursed is everyone who is hanged on a tree”— so that in Christ Jesus the blessing of Abraham might come to the Gentiles, so that we might receive the promised Spirit through faith.
Go ahead and keep the Law if you think you can and if you think it will do you any good.
See if you can do it, and get back to us and let us know how it worked out.
Probably.
Genesis 9:4 But you shall not eat flesh with its life , that is, its blood.
Leviticus 3:17 It shall be a statute forever throughout your generations, in all your dwelling places, that you eat neither fat nor blood.”
Leviticus 7:26-27 Moreover, you shall eat no blood whatever, whether of fowl or of animal, in any of your dwelling places. Whoever eats any blood, that person shall be cut off from his people.”
Leviticus 17:10-14 “If any one of the house of Israel or of the strangers who sojourn among them eats any blood, I will set my face against that person who eats blood and will cut him off from among his people. For the life of the flesh is in the blood, and I have given it for you on the altar to make atonement for your souls, for it is the blood that makes atonement by the life. Therefore I have said to the people of Israel, No person among you shall eat blood, neither shall any stranger who sojourns among you eat blood.
“Any one also of the people of Israel, or of the strangers who sojourn among them, who takes in hunting any beast or bird that may be eaten shall pour out its blood and cover it with earth. For the life of every creature is its blood: its blood is its life. Therefore I have said to the people of Israel, You shall not eat the blood of any creature, for the life of every creature is its blood. Whoever eats it shall be cut off.
Leviticus 19:26 “You shall not eat any flesh with the blood in it. You shall not interpret omens or tell fortunes.
Deuteronomy 12:16 Only you shall not eat the blood ; you shall pour it out on the earth like water.
Deuteronomy 12:23 Only be sure that you do not eat the blood, for the blood is the life , and you shall not eat the life with the flesh.
Deuteronomy 15:23 Only you shall not eat its blood; you shall pour it out on the ground like water.
Acts 15:12-29 And all the assembly fell silent, and they listened to Barnabas and Paul as they related what signs and wonders God had done through them among the Gentiles. After they finished speaking, James replied, “Brothers, listen to me. Simeon has related how God first visited the Gentiles, to take from them a people for his name. And with this the words of the prophets agree, just as it is written,
“‘After this I will return, and I will rebuild the tent of David that has fallen; I will rebuild its ruins, and I will restore it, that the remnant of mankind may seek the Lord, and all the Gentiles who are called by my name, says the Lord, who makes these things known from of old.’
Therefore my judgment is that we should not trouble those of the Gentiles who turn to God, but should write to them to abstain from the things polluted by idols, and from sexual immorality, and from what has been strangled, and from blood. For from ancient generations Moses has had in every city those who proclaim him, for he is read every Sabbath in the synagogues.”
Then it seemed good to the apostles and the elders, with the whole church, to choose men from among them and send them to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas. They sent Judas called Barsabbas, and Silas, leading men among the brothers, with the following letter:
“The brothers, both the apostles and the elders, to the brothers who are of the Gentiles in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia, greetings. Since we have heard that some persons have gone out from us and troubled you with words, unsettling your minds, although we gave them no instructions, it has seemed good to us, having come to one accord, to choose men and send them to you with our beloved Barnabas and Paul, men who have risked their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. We have therefore sent Judas and Silas, who themselves will tell you the same things by word of mouth. For it has seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay on you no greater burden than these requirements: that you abstain from what has been sacrificed to idols, and from blood, and from what has been strangled, and from sexual immorality. If you keep yourselves from these, you will do well. Farewell.”
Matthew 26:29 I tell you I will not drink again of this fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father’s kingdom.”
Mark 14:25 Truly, I say to you, I will not drink again of the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new in the kingdom of God.”
Luke 22:18 For I tell you that from now on I will not drink of the fruit of the vine until the kingdom of God comes.”
John 6:63 It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh is no help at all. The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life.
Unbloody sacrifice
http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P41.HTM
1367 The sacrifice of Christ and the sacrifice of the Eucharist are one single sacrifice: "The victim is one and the same: the same now offers through the ministry of priests, who then offered himself on the cross; only the manner of offering is different." "In this divine sacrifice which is celebrated in the Mass, the same Christ who offered himself once in a bloody manner on the altar of the cross is contained and is offered in an unbloody manner."188
Deuteronomy 12:16 Only you shall not eat the blood ; you shall pour it out on the earth like water.
When Christ died, His blood was poured out as was required by the law.
Hebrews 9:22 Indeed, under the law almost everything is purified with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins.
Since without the shedding of blood, there is no remission of sins, a bloodless sacrifice is a useless one. It cannot atone for sin.
Jesus commanded His disciples to drink the cup. Catholics claim that doing so is partaking of the literal body and blood of Himself. However, if the mass is an unbloody sacrifice, where does the blood for the cup come from?
Which body of Christ is the priest sacrificing in the mass? The old one that walked this earth?
Or the new resurrected and glorified one?
The Bible is very clear that without the shedding of blood there can be no remission of sin. (Hebrews 9:22)
“For the life of the flesh is in the blood: and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls: for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul.” (Leviticus 17:11)
Despite the clear teaching of Scripture, Rome has an “unbloody sacrifice.” They say it’s a propitiatory sacrifice, but the Bible says without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness. So not only is it unnecessary to sacrifice Christ again and again, but an unbloody sacrifice is worthless to make atonement for sin. An unbloody sacrifice is no sacrifice at all! (By .45 Long Colt)
Thanks for putting it so succinctly LC.
My faith is in HIM, not in eating Him according to church ordinance.
JESUS saves me.
Catholicism doesn’t save anyone.
The sacraments are not magic, or medical treatments. They are encounters with God, and channels through which God desires to give grace.
As such, people can reject the grace that is being offered, even if they outwardly go through the motions.
Going to Communion does Nancy Pelosi no good, since she promotes mass murder and other evils. Each time she receives Communion, she commits another crime against Jesus Christ.
Exactly.
Jesus specifically described Abraham, David, etc., as “living.” “God is God of the living, not the dead.”
Yet, flying in the face of what Jesus taught, people frequently describe Mary as “DEAD.” They capitalize it and use exclamation points.
Then why didn’t Jesus call back those who were scandalized and deserting him, and explain that he didn’t really mean it when he said to eat his flesh and drink his blood?
Why was Jesus such an incompetent teacher that he would mislead hundreds of people?
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.