Posted on 12/04/2006 7:52:47 PM PST by Pyro7480
You didn't present anything but a bunch of false assertions about what I believe. Sorry, my answers are on this thread. Look for them.
"St. Seraphim of Sarov was transfigured in light during his conversation with Motovilov, even as Our Lord was on Mount ..."
Huh?
The misunderstanding of the phrase 'Mother of God' you are objecting to is one reason that we Orthodox tend to leave the technical Greek theological term in Greek even in your English translations of hymnograpy: Theotokos.
The infelicitous Englishing of the term as "Birthgiver of God" is closer to the sense of the original Greek than "Mother of God".
You really ought to read the decrees of the Third Ecumenical Council against Nestorius to get the full sense of the term, and why the title is necessary to a proper understanding of Christ.
Well, you *can* do a Google search for "Seraphim of Sarov" and Motovilov if you don't know what I'm talking about.
I did and I don't believe it.
So you don't believe that we are to become partakers of the divine nature as St. Peter wrote in his second universal epistle? Or do you have some problem with it happening before our physical death?
That's an ad hominem.
Do you think the Godhead died on Calvary? Is that what you're saying?
No. I never said that. Christ died on Calvary. And Christ is truly God. And so in truth God died on Calvary. That does not imply or entail that the Godhead died on Calvary. (That would be a heresy, patripassionism and/or Sabellianism.)
-A8
You're very close. It all depends on how you are using that little word "as" both times. Mary did not give to the Logos His divine nature. But she did give to the Logos His human nature, His human beginning. She is the Mother of the Logos (and hence the Mother of God) because she gave birth to the Logos according to His human nature.
-A8
I have a hard time believing that after Christ's transformation that it would happen to someone else.
It's not an ad hominem if you ARE using the language loosely...which you are.
If the Godhead was not on the cross, then SPECIFICALLY who was?
I say it was the incarnate 2d Person of the Godhead.
Do you think it was the 1st Person of the Godhead or the 3rd?
Well, the Fathers commenting on St. Peter's Second Epistle, and Christ's rhetorical self-defense in which he quoted the Psalmist " . . .I have said ye are gods. . ." say what He is by nature, we are to become by grace.
If your concern is whether or not I believe Jesus was God at conception - He was. And before then.
Saying she gave him his beginning as man, I can partially agree with (in that she didn't do it alone. Only God could have performed this miracle. He used Mary's body to do so, and she was humbled that he would choose her).
I just dislike the term mother of God, because of what it implies on the surface. Theology can be difficult to grasp at times, without using terms that need to be carefully qualified in order to be understood properly. Mother of God is not the only confusing term that is used. But it would be just as easy to call her Mother of Christ or Mother of the Son of God. Or even to a point Mother of the God-Man Jesus Christ. Mother of God implies she preexisted God and is just an innecessarily confusing term. IMHO
The Church does not draft her documents for those who don't know theology, those misinformed and uneducated folks who might misunderstand a term if they came across it. She drafts her documents for her bishops and priests, those knowing the theology and tradition of the Church. The Council of Ephesus in 431 declared Mary to be the "Mother of God" specifically in response to the Nestorian heresy, and after the doctrine of the Trinity had been hammered out in the first two councils. The Catholic clergy would in no way misinterpret "mother of God" to mean that Mary was the source of the divine nature. And as I showed above, denying that Mary is "the mother of God" logically entails one of three heresies, and therefore the Church must affirm it.
-A8
You are free to dislike the terms. . You say that she is a virtuous woman? How virtuous? Do you draw any distinction between her and Elizabeth? There exist degrees of natural virtues. There exist different charisms. Some saints are greater than others. Mary a role model? Only as the model Christian. As the mother of Jesus, however, she was closer to Jesus--literally--than any other human being not just until she gave birth to him but afterwards. She was his mother. To say,as you and Nestorius siad, that she was only the Mother of Jesus, or the Mother of Christ is to try to separate his divine nature from his human nature. His human nature was as much the doing of God as his divine nature.
Why do you keep saying that Mary is the mother of the Father?
That's exactly what the Nestorians and Arians wanted to do. Those are attacks on the *deity* of Christ.
Christians are called "sons of God". See John 1:12, Rom 8:14,19; Philippians 2:15; 1 John 3:1-2. So if Mary is merely the mother of the "son of God", then that makes Christ no more divine you or me.
And to be "Christ" does not necessarily mean to be "God". So, to call Mary merely the "mother of Christ" makes it possible that Christ was a mere man.
The Council knew what they were doing. Christ's divinity was at stake. And if you cave on "mother of God", you are giving away Christ's deity.
-A8
Why do you keep denying the divinity of the Son and the Holy Spirit?
-A8
The point is that neither Thayer or Liddell-Scott attach any special meaning to the "ou" adverb. The "till" os "until" are valid translations (in my mind, "until" leans more to the meaning you want that "till"). Either with or without "ou" "eos" describes the condition prior to the event controlled by "eos"; whether or not the event changes the condition (e.g, as you argue. St. Joseph no longer abstains from carnal relations with Our Lady) is to be determined by context.
So you agree that Mary is the mother of the FAther?
No! The Church has never claimed that Mary is the mother of the Father. To claim that Mary is the mother of the Father is heresy!
-A8
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.