Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: SoothingDave
Protestant here objects to the term because of what it explicitly does not mean.

If they agree to the underlying point (Jesus being fully God and fully man and his being fully God from "the primordial beginning" (ever)) I don't see why you're pushing so hard to get assent to the term "theotokos." I think that makes them doubt your agenda. If we agree as to Jesus being fully God and fully man, and that He was God from the beginning, I don't see a point in wrangling over a name, i.e. - Theotokos.

2,001 posted on 10/22/2001 2:29:11 PM PDT by the808bass
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1943 | View Replies ]


To: the808bass
I don't see why you're pushing so hard to get assent to the term "theotokos." I think that makes them doubt your agenda.

Bass, it could be a basis of agreement between us. They could say "those crazy Catholics may have overdone it, but the basic idea is true."

They could affirm at least one of our Mary teachings as being both Biblical and sensical.

SD

2,009 posted on 10/22/2001 2:38:36 PM PDT by SoothingDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2001 | View Replies ]

To: the808bass
If they agree to the underlying point (Jesus being fully God and fully man and his being fully God from "the primordial beginning" (ever)) I don't see why you're pushing so hard to get assent to the term "theotokos." I think that makes them doubt your agenda. If we agree as to Jesus being fully God and fully man, and that He was God from the beginning, I don't see a point in wrangling over a name, i.e. - Theotokos.

The point, I think, is that it gets rather frustrating seeing the same people, time and time again, build up the same giant strawmen, knock them down, and then think they have accomplished something.

SoothingDave has hit the nail on the head. If our Protestant brethren wish to deny the dogma of qeotokos as it was properly defined at the Council of Ephesus and thereby abandon the historic teaching of Christianity, fine. But that is not what they are doing. They are denying what they have built up in their minds that which has no basis in reality. In the process of these denials of their completely false understanding of the doctrine, they spout off one Christological heresy after another. It is that which truly grieves me the most.

For the edification of all those reading, I give you the teaching of the Council of Ephesus:

"This expression, however, "the Word was made flesh," can mean nothing else but that he partook of flesh and blood like to us; he made our body his own, and came forth man from a woman, not casting off his existence as God, or his generation of God the Father, but even in taking to himself flesh remaining what he was. This the declaration of the correct faith proclaims everywhere. This was the sentiment of the holy Fathers; therefore they ventured to call the holy Virgin, the Mother of God, not as if the nature of the Word or his divinity had its beginning from the holy Virgin, but because of her was born that holy body with a rational soul, to which the Word being personally united is said to be born according to the flesh." (Second Epistle of Cyril to Nestorius - Approved by the Council of Ephesus)

"1. If anyone will not confess that the Emmanuel is very God, and that therefore the Holy Virgin is the Mother of God (qeotokos), inasmuch as in the flesh she bore the Word of God made flesh [as it is written, 'The Word was made flesh': let him be anathema." (Twelve Anathemas Proposed by Cyril and accepted by the Council of Ephesus)

Pray for John Paul II

2,102 posted on 10/23/2001 3:36:51 AM PDT by dignan3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2001 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


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