Posted on 01/11/2012 7:34:56 PM PST by RnMomof7
Mary: Mother of God?
This article is prompted by an ad in the Parade Magazine titled: "Mary Mother of God: What All Mankind Should Know." The offer was made for a free pamphlet entitled "Mary Mother of Jesus" with this explanation: "A clear, insightful pamphlet explains the importance of Mary and her role as Mother of God."
This is quite a claim, to say the least! Nowhere in the Bible is Mary said to be the mother of God. I touched on this subject in a series on "Mary Co-Redeemer with Christ" printed recently.
Question: If Mary is the Mother of God, Who, may I ask, is the Father of God? Does God have a Father, and if He does, Who is His Mother?
The phrase "Mother of God" originated in the Council of Ephesus, in the year 431 AD. It occurs in the Creed of Chalcedon, which was adopted by the council in 451 AD. This was the declaration given at that time: "Born of the Virgin Mary, the Mother of God according to the Manhood." The purpose of this statement originally was meant to emphasize the deity of Christ over against the teaching of the Nestorians whose teaching involved a dual-natured Jesus. Their teaching was that the person born of Mary was only a man who was then indwelt by God. The title "Mother of God" was used originally to counter this false doctrine. The doctrine now emphasizes the person of Mary rather than the deity of Jesus as God incarnate. Mary certainly did not give birth to God. In fact, Mary did not give birth to the divinity of Christ. Mary only gave birth to the humanity of Jesus. The only thing Jesus got from Mary was a body. Every Human Being has received a sinful nature from their parents with one exception: Jesus was not human. He was divine God in a flesh body. This is what Mary gave birth to. Read Hebrews 10:5 and Phil 2:5-11.
Please refer to Hebrews 10:5 where we see. "...Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me."
The body of Jesus was prepared by God. In Matthew 1:18, "she was found with child of the Holy Ghost."
The divine nature of Jesus existed from before eternity, and this cannot be said of Mary Jesus never called her "mother". He called her "woman".
This doctrine deifies Mary and humanizes Jesus. Mary is presented as stronger that Christ, more mature and more powerful that Christ. Listen to this statement by Rome: "He came to us through Mary, and we must go to Him through her." The Bible plainly states that God is the Creator of all things. It is a blasphemous attack on the eternity of God to ever teach that He has a mother. Mary had other children who were normal, physical, sinful human beings. In the case of Jesus Christ, "His human nature had no father and His divine nature had no mother."
It is probably no coincidence that this false doctrine surrounding Mary was born in Ephesus. Please read Acts 19:11-41 and see that Ephesus had a problem with goddess worship. Her name was Diana, Gk. Artemis. You will not have to study very deep to find the similarities between the goddess Diana and the Roman Catholic goddess, Mary. It should be noted that the Mary of the 1st century and the Mary of the 20th century are not the same. Mary of the 1st century was the virgin who gave birth to the Messiah. Mary of the 20th century is a goddess created by the Roman Catholic Church. A simple comparison of what the Bible teaches about Mary and what the Roman Catholic Church teaches about her will reveal two different Marys. Mary is not the "Mother of God." If she were she would be GOD! There is only one true, eternal God. He was not born of a woman. Any teaching on any subject should be backed up by the word of God. If it cannot be supported by Scriptures, it is false doctrine.
Mother of God was Istar’s title 3500 years before the catholics tried to hang that blasphemous handle on Mary.
>>So what does one have to do with another? The irony with your comment here is that the descendants of the Babylonians REJECTED the title “Mother of God.”
The conspiracy theory falls flat and is about as ridiculous as some Jehovah’s Witnesses saying that St. Michael and Jesus are the same person.
Not one of the real apostles ever said that they held that creed, so why call it The Apostles Creed?
.
The Greek term defined by the Council of Ephesus is Theotokos, which means birthgiver of God or God-bearer.
The term “Mother of God” is an English colloquialism.
He always was and always will be...The same yesterday, today and tomorrow...Jesus existed as the Son for all eternity ..He never "acquired" divinity ..He is Divine...
He [Jesus] is before all things, and in Him all things hold together." - (NASB) Colossians 1:17
I'll bet that neither of you did very well in the religion class, and would have fallen flat in a real theology course...immaculate conception...did not the angel address her as "full of grace"? sounds sinless to me...blessed art thou among women...kind of places her above other women wouldn't you say???
“From the Holy Spirit at conception”
ummm, the Christian Faith teaches that Jesus is true God, He is without beginning and without end.
He didn’t “acquire” divinity at conception, HE ALWAYS WAS DIVINE, HE ALWAYS WILL BE DIVINE.
i am not suprised that someone who thinks Catholics worship Mary, doesn’t know who Jesus Christ is.
He was divine God in a flesh body. This is what Mary gave birth to.
>>Did Jesus have a human soul?
it mentions the Catholic Church, so it must be evil!!
LOL!
Nope, already met Him. He lives in my heart by faith.
John 14:23 Jesus answered him, “If anyone loves me, he will keep my word, and my Father will love him, and we will come to him and make our home with him.
Ephesians 3:14-19 14 For this reason I bow my knees before the Father, 15 from whom every family in heaven and on earth is named, 16 that according to the riches of his glory he may grant you to be strengthened with power through his Spirit in your inner being, 17 so that Christ may dwell in your hearts through faith—that you, being rooted and grounded in love, 18 may have strength to comprehend with all the saints what is the breadth and length and height and depth, 19 and to know the love of Christ that surpasses knowledge, that you may be filled with all the fullness of God.
What are you going to say to him when he asks you why you did not believe in his divinity as well as his humanity? What are you going to say to him when he asks you why you never believed that his Mother gave birth to an infant, both human and divine?
Do you really think He's going to ask that? How do you know?
Would not these be sins against the Holy Spirit, for Christ was conceived in Mary through the Holy Spirit?
You tell me. And if you could provide chapter and verse, that would help.
You’re babbling nothing but doubletalk.
The fact revealed in my post remains the basis of the Mary heresy, and nothing you utter will ever change that.
You have to understand, though the Reformers defended the title Mother of God, they did not have the Scriptural knowledge that the author of this article does.
If I follow this twit brained noodge’s logic I would have to believe that St. Cyril of Alexandria was a follower of Artemis. So what shall I do with the anathema’s he issued against Nestorious?
“If anyone will not confess that the Emmanuel is very God, and that therefore the Holy Virgin is the Mother of God, 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.
2. If anyone shall not confess that the Word of God the Father is united hypostatically to flesh, and that with that flesh of his own, he is one only Christ both God and man at the same time: let him be anathema.
3. If anyone shall after the [hypostatic] union divide the hypostases in the one Christ, joining them by that connexion alone, which happens according to worthiness, or even authority and power, and not rather by a coming together, which is made by natural union: let him be anathema.
4. If anyone shall divide between two persons or subsistences those expressions which are contained in the Evangelical and Apostolical writings, or which have been said concerning Christ by the Saints, or by himself, and shall apply some to him as to a man separate from the Word of God, and shall apply others to the only Word of God the Father, on the ground that they are fit to be applied to God: let him be anathema.
5. If anyone shall dare to say that the Christ is a Theophorus [that is, God-bearing] man and not rather that he is very God, as an only Son through nature, because “the Word was made flesh,” and “hath a share in flesh and blood as we do:” let him be anathema.
6. If anyone shall dare say that the Word of God the Father is the God of Christ or the Lord of Christ, and shall not rather confess him as at the same time both God and Man, since according to the Scriptures, “The Word was made flesh”: let him be anathema.
7. If anyone shall say that Jesus as man is only energized by the Word of God, and that the glory of the Only-begotten is attributed to him as something not properly his: let him be anathema.
8. If anyone shall dare to say that the assumed man ought to be worshipped together with God the Word, and glorified together with him, and recognised together with him as God, and yet as two different things, the one with the other (for this “Together with” is added [i.e., by the Nestorians] to convey this meaning); and shall not rather with one adoration worship the Emmanuel and pay to him one glorification, as [it is written] “The Word was made flesh”: let him be anathema.
9. If any man shall say that the one Lord Jesus Christ was glorified by the Holy Ghost, so that he used through him a power not his own and from him received power against unclean spirits and power to work miracles before men and shall not rather confess that it was his own Spirit through which he worked these divine signs; let him be anathema.
10. Divine Scripture says, that Christ became High Priest and Apostle of our confession, and that he offered himself for us a sweet-smelling savour to God the Father. Whosoever shall say that it is not the divine Word himself, when he was made flesh and had become man as we are, but another than he, a man born of a woman, yet different from him, who is become our Great High Priest and Apostle; or if any man shall say that he offered himself in sacrifice for himself and not rather for us, whereas, being without sin, he had no need of offering or sacrifice: let him be anathema.
11. Whosoever shall not confess that the flesh of the Lord giveth life and that it pertains to the Word of God the Father as his very own, but shall pretend that it belongs to another person who is united to him [i.e., the Word] only according to honour, and who has served as a dwelling for the divinity; and shall not rather confess, as we say, that that flesh giveth life because it is that of the Word who giveth life to all: let him be anathema.
12. Whosoever shall not recognize that the Word of God suffered in the flesh, that he was crucified in the flesh, and that likewise in that same flesh he tasted death and that he is become the first-begotten of the dead, for, as he is God, he is the life and it is he that giveth life: let him be anathema.”
Oh yeah that just smacks of the cult of Artemis/sarc.
Because it's not more accurate, but less. :)
Just as 'messiah' comes from the Hebrew for anointed and doesn't mean divine; Christ comes from the Greek word 'Christos', also means anointed and doesn't mean divine.
David for example was anointed; if we spoke greek we could say his mother was the Mother of Christ. And, I've heard many a minister claim his anointing by God. If they were Greek speakers they would be saying Christos.
So the "Mother of Christ" doesn't say fully what orthodox Christians believe Jesus really is.
The fact revealed in my post remains the basis of the Mary heresy, and nothing you utter will ever change that.
>>Your reading of scripture reminds me of something that St. Clement of Alexandria said about the heretics of his day.
... But if it is not enough merely to state the opinion, but if what is stated must be confirmed, we do not wait for the testimony of men, but we establish the matter that is in question by the voice of the Lord, which is the surest of all demonstrations, or rather is the only demonstration; in which knowledge those who have merely tasted the Scriptures are believers;... Since also, in what pertains to life, craftsmen are superior to ordinary people, and model what is beyond common notions; so, consequently, we also, giving a complete exhibition of the Scriptures from the Scriptures themselves, from faith persuade by demonstration.
And if those also who follow heresies venture to avail themselves of the prophetic Scriptures; in the first place they will not make use of all the Scriptures, and then they will not quote them entire, nor as the body and texture of prophecy prescribe. But, selecting ambiguous expressions, they wrest them to their own opinions, gathering a few expressions here and there; not looking to the sense, but making use of the mere words. For in almost all the quotations they make, you will find that they attend to the names alone, while they alter the meanings; neither knowing, as they affirm, nor using the quotations they adduce, according to their true nature.
But the truth is not found by changing the meanings (for so people subvert all true teaching), but in the consideration of what perfectly belongs to and becomes the Sovereign God, and in establishing each one of the points demonstrated in the Scriptures again from similar Scriptures. Neither, then, do they want to turn to the truth, being ashamed to abandon the claims of self-love; nor are they able to manage their opinions, by doing violence to the Scriptures. But having first promulgated false dogmas to men; plainly fighting against almost the whole Scriptures, and constantly confuted by us who contradict them; for the rest, even now partly they hold out against admitting the prophetic Scriptures, and partly disparage us as of a different nature, and incapable of understanding what is peculiar to them. And sometimes even they deny their own dogmas, when these are confuted, being ashamed openly to own what in private they glory in teaching. For this may be seen in all the heresies, when you examine the iniquities of their dogmas. For when they are overturned by our clearly showing that they are opposed to the Scriptures, one of two things may be seen to have been done by those who defend the dogma. For they either despise the consistency of their own dogmas, or despise the prophecy itself, or rather their own hope. And they invariably prefer what seems to them to be more evident to what has been spoken by the Lord through the prophets and by the Gospel, and, besides, attested and confirmed by the apostles.
http://www.bible-researcher.com/clement-misuse.html
>> “So, Jesus was only human when he was born” <<
.
No! - He became a human when he was born, but he was always the son of God. (from everlasting to everlasting)
Jesus Christ walked the Holy Lands building a Church. Jesus Christ did not hand out Bibles saying, ‘Here read this & argue about it.’
There is ONE Church. The Saints in Heaven & the people on earth in a state of God’s Grace are all building blocks in the ONE Church.
In most Protestant Churches they have what is called a >’Prayer chain’ where people are asked to pray (Sometimes even Uncle Harry is asked to pray).
The Roman Catholic Church has a Prayer chain too & they also include the Saints in Heaven as part of the Prayer Chain. It’s that easy> as it’s intercessory prayer that includes the whole Church. (The people in Heaven & the people on Earth.)
A Priest in the Roman Catholic Church said, ‘God knows all our prayers before we pray them. God knows what we want & what we need. One of the purposes of prayers is to open our hearts to God so that God can transform our hearts.’
thanks for posting.
the so called baptist minister who wrote this article would learn a lot from reading your post, especially anathema #12.
You need to explain that to the person upthread who said he was only born human.
At the particular judgment you will know whether you are going to heaven or to hell.
At the General Judgment, EVERYONE will know whether you are a sheep or a goat.
So Jesus was not a person? And how does saying He is the 2nd Person of the Holy Trinity (which of course is eternal) mean one does not believe He is God. The Incarnate Word, The Logos, The Emmanual, The Messiah? That God took flesh and cast His tent amongst us?
This is not unique to Catholic teaching all orthodox Christians teach this. Christ is God in the Flesh. He is the 2nd person of the Holy Trinity.
From Youngs LITERAL Greek translation
Luk 1:28 And the messenger having come in unto her, said, `Hail, favoured one, the Lord [is] with thee; blessed [art] thou among women;'
charitoō
This is NOT A NOUN describing someone..it is a VERB..an action
1) to make graceful
a) charming, lovely, agreeable
2) to peruse with grace, compass with favour
3) to honour with blessings
Grace is not a liquid like gas that we fill a tank with.. it is Gods unearned favor..
God had favored her with the blessing of being the mother of my Savior.. she was blessed..
There is not one thing anywhere to suggest she was sinless...
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.