Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: aMorePerfectUnion
>>> Mary was his earthly mother. That doesn’t not mean she created God. She bore God. She didn’t create God through conception. Jesus existed as God from all eternity. <<<

The title "Mother of God" doesn't state that "she created God". It merely affirms that she bore God. Otherwise, every stepmom and surrogate mother on this planet could claim they "created" their child.

Angelina Jolie is the mother of Maddox Chivan. However, she certainly didn't create Maddox Chivan. In fact, it would be impossible, since he's Cambodian and she's not

118 posted on 08/18/2015 12:04:48 AM PDT by BillyBoy (Impeach Obama? Yes We Can!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies ]


To: Charles Henrickson
>> Mary bore Jesus Christ. Bore his human nature. Bore his divine nature. <<
For this reason, it is true to refer to Mary as “bearing God.”
<<

Gee, nice to know that Mary as God-bearer is not some "the Roman Church made up"

If we can agree on these basic points, I have no problem with your theological understanding of Jesus, even though I find it bizarre that someone who affirms that Mary gave birth to God doesn't want to use the phrase "mother of God". It would like me acknowledging that Texas is in the United States and that Texans are citizens, but insisting that calling Texas "Americans" is an unfair honorary title because the Constitution doesn't mention that Texans are Americans.

The problem is here is several so called "Christians" on this very thread aren't even willing to accept the basic Christian belief that Mary gave birth to God incarnate. They have stated quite openly that she only gave birth to "Jesus, the human person". Again, this is a grave heresy in mainstream Christianity whether you're Catholic, Protestant, or Orthodox. It's on par with denying the resurrection or any other basic Christian dogma. If any practicing "Christian" sincerely thinks that Mary "only" gave birth to a human man named Jesus and the two natures are entirely separate, or that is divinity wasn't present when he was in the womb and that he "became" God later on, they need to sit down with their pastor and learn some basic theological facts about their faith. If they are still unwilling to accept that Jesus was God incarnate from the moment He was conceived and when He was in Mary's womb, they really shouldn't be self-identifies as Christian, IMNO.

>> Mary didn’t conceive his divine nature. He preexisted from all eternity as God. <<

Agreed. Again, I'm simply not seeing how saying "Mary is the mother of God" makes any claim that she's "higher" than God, or that she "created" God", or "existed before God", or "conceived" his divinity, or any of the other claims made on this board. Again, many people are universally acknowledged as mothers. None of that is applied to them:

Saying Stanley Ann Durham is the mother of President Obama doesn't mean she's "higher" than the President or gave him the office and powers of President.

Saying Dorothy is the mother of Sam the fireman doesn't mean "Dorothy existed before there were firemen".

Saying Angelina Jolie is the mother of Maddox Chivan doesn't mean she "created" or "conceived" Maddox Chivan.

So why does saying Mary is mother of God "imply" any of that about God?

122 posted on 08/18/2015 12:53:19 AM PDT by BillyBoy (Impeach Obama? Yes We Can!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 118 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson