Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: Quix; roamer_1; Amityschild; Brad's Gramma; Cvengr; DvdMom; firebrand; GiovannaNicoletta; ...

It dawned on me recently that the confusion inherant with the phrase “Mother of God” being identified with Mary is one which actually conflicts with Catholic doctrine.

Specifically, when on studies the doctrines of the Trinity, the Hypostatic Union, and of Kenosis, it is clear that our Lord and Savior Christ Jesus, had both a human nature and a divine nature, such that no attribute of His Divine nature was changed, for He is immutable. There was no suppression of His divine essence.

Likewise, in His hypostatic union, the attributes of the human and divine natures are united without transfer of their attributes. His divine nature was not changed nor diminished by His human nature nor by his voluntary restriction.

His divine attributes did not bleed over into his human attributes nor his human attributes into His Diety. In another way of expression, to rob God of any of His divine attributes is to deny His deity and to rob any of His human attributes robs Him of His humanity.

He established a spiritual life in His human nature. He did not bleed Divinity to form His human spirit, but relied instead upon the Plan of God the Father and in what He provided by God the Holy Spirit in His spirituality.

If one were to confuse the divine nature of Jesus Christ as having been born from Mary, then one would misidentify the doctrine of the Trinity.

If one confuses the humanity of Jesus Christ with His divine nature, then one denies the value of the Cross to redeem all mankind to the Father.

Mary did not provide the divine nature to Jesus Christ for it existed before all of Creation.


538 posted on 03/17/2010 8:16:47 PM PDT by Cvengr (Adversity in life and death is inevitable. Thru faith in Christ, stress is optional.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 511 | View Replies ]


To: Cvengr

Worthy points, I think . . . as much as I understand them. LOL.

Which I think is pretty much.


541 posted on 03/17/2010 8:21:34 PM PDT by Quix (BLOKES who got us where we R: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2130557/posts?page=81#81)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 538 | View Replies ]

To: Cvengr

“Mary did not provide the divine nature to Jesus Christ for it existed before all of Creation” —> of course she did NOT — that is completely contradictory to Church teachings. However, Christ was born to her, and Christ was completely man and completely God. She was the New Testament Ark that carried the Word that was God,that was Jesus Christ. You have correctly enunciated an orthodox belief in opposition to an Arian and to a monophysite and to a nestorian (pardons to Nestorius) one.


542 posted on 03/17/2010 8:26:44 PM PDT by Cronos (Philipp2:12, 2Cor5:10, Rom2:6, Matt7:21, Matt22:14, Lu12:42-46,John15:1-10,Rev2:4-5,Rev22:19)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 538 | View Replies ]

To: Cvengr; Alamo-Girl; Quix; stfassisi
Magnificently put, Cvengr!

PAX CHRISTI

544 posted on 03/17/2010 8:42:26 PM PDT by betty boop (Moral law is not rooted in factual laws of nature; they only tell us what happens, not what ought to)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 538 | View Replies ]

To: Cvengr; Quix
Mary did not provide the divine nature to Jesus Christ for it existed before all of Creation.

Kinda frustrating that this obvious truth seems so oblique to those who insist on peering around a corner which doesn't exist to see a secret which is right there in the middle of the street, eh?

Well put.


Frowning takes 68 muscles.
Smiling takes 6.
Pulling this trigger takes 2.
I'm lazy.

555 posted on 03/17/2010 9:44:52 PM PDT by The Comedian (Evil can only succeed if good men don't point at it and laugh.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 538 | 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