Posted on 08/17/2015 6:07:35 PM PDT by NKP_Vet
It is that time of week again, where we talk about the Mary, the Mother of God. This is definitely the single most important title that Mary has. If someone gets this wrong, then they get the Divinity of our Lord wrong, and that means the whole plan of Salvation is just messed up. So let us look at this most important title.
Theotokos, God-bearer in Greek, is what the council of Ephesus declared in 431. It specifically says this “If anyone does not confess that God is truly Emmanuel, and that on this account the Holy Virgin is the Mother of God (for according to the flesh she gave birth to the Word of God become flesh by birth), let him be anathema.” Now just that statement alone proves the early Church believed that there was Authority given to the bishops to decide sound doctrine, Mary was a Holy Virgin her entire life, and that She bore God. However, we only have time for one today.
Now many times we will hear non-Catholics tell us that this title is nowhere found in Scripture, explicitly at least. However, they cannot themselves find a Scripture verse that says that all doctrine and dogma must be explicitly proven in Scripture. I bet they can never find that. This is a trap they set up for themselves and it is a very unfair double standard that they expect us to meet, but they do not have to. However, on top of this double standard is if we used that same standard, then the doctrine of the Trinity is thrown out, since it’s not an explicit teaching, but instead is implicit in Scripture. This double standard seems to cause more problems that it’s worth wouldn’t you say?
Here is the cold hard truth of it though, all Christians rely on some Church Tradition, as well as Scripture, to validate their doctrines, whether they admit it or not. With that being said, Scripture and Tradition can never contradict one another. The Traditions of men can contradict the Word of God, but the Traditions God left us, through Christ, in the Holy Spirit, are binding upon us, as we are to hold fast to Traditions. So then, what is the real question? The real question is, Does Scripture contradict the teaching that Mary is the Mother of God, and is that doctrine found in Scripture at least implicitly?
Let us begin with Luke 1:43, where Mary visited Elizabeth. There Elizabeth exclaimed “Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb! And why is this granted me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?” Because Mary was the Mother of the Lord, who is the Second part of the Holy Trinity, Mary is truly and rightfully called the Mother of God.
We also see in Isaiah 7:14 “Behold a virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and they shall call His name Emmanuel, which is interpreted God with us.” Jesus is God. He was God when He was in the womb, conceived, lived, died, buried, resurrected, in the Eucharist, and in Heaven. The Messiah, who is God, was to be born of a virgin, according to Scripture. God was born of a virgin, and it’s right there in Isaiah, who prophesied of Christ birth. That means both Old and New Testament support the Catholic Doctrine of the Mother of God.
However, this may not be enough for some non-Catholics. Some say that Elisabeth called Christ Lord, and not God, saying that Mary was only to give birth to the human child, the Lord Jesus Christ. So then the question becomes, does lord here mean divinity or just authority? Let’s look at the context.
First let us look at 1 Cor. 8:5, which states “Indeed there are many gods and many lords, yet to us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things, and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist.” St. Paul makes it clear that Jesus is the one True, Lord, as opposed to all the false ones, that the pagans who converted in Corinth were probably worshiping. So then, they would understand that Jesus is God. This holds true to the Jews who converted too, who would know Deut. 6:4 “Hear, therefore, o Israel, the Lord our God is one Lord.”
So then that brings us back to Luke 1:43. Elizabeth calls Mary the mother of her Lord. The Mother…Mothers give birth to persons, not natures, let us remember that. Mary did not just give birth to the human nature of Christ, she gave birth to the person of Christ. Christ personhood is Divine, it is God the Son.
Then let us look at 2 Sam. 6:9 where the King, who was David says “How can the ark of the Lord come to me (being the ark of the covenant)” Then in 2 Samuel 616 we see King David leaping in the presence of the Ark, just as John the Baptist did. Then we yet again see another parallel, which says that the ark of the Lord abode in the house of Obededom the Gethite for three months (2 Sam. 6:11), and according to Luke 1:56 Mary remained in the house of Elizabeth about three months. Then, we see that the ark of the covenant carried three items, manna, the Ten Commandments, and Aaron’s rod. These are all types of things Christ are, the Bread of Life, Word made Flesh, and our true High Priest.
Even knowing all this though, there are still those who would deny that Mary is the Mother of God. So then we have to ask, who is Jesus Christ to them? If Mary is not the Mother of God, then who did she give birth to? Many would say it was an earthly human lord, not God. So then, what does that make Christ? If Mary did not give birth to God, then who did she give birth to? Was not Christ God when He was conceived?
If someone says Mary only gave birth to the person of Christ one of two errors, or both could happen, and that is the Denial of the divinity of Christ, and that one would have to say Christ is two distinct persons, and that he is not One. Both were considered heresy in the Early Church. Christ is one Person, with two natures, Divine and Human, which go together and are not separate of one another. If one denies that, the ultimately they are speaking about a different Christ, and St. Paul warns us about that problem, and to not to give heed to them (2 Cor. 11:4).
So then, some say that Mary is the mother of the Trinity if we take it that far, however, this is not true. Mary gave birth to the 2nd part of the Trinity, the 2nd Person, who is still God just not the Trinity. However, we must never forget that each Person in the Trinity shares the same Divine Nature and is fully God.
One thing some still point out is that Christ is eternal, so for Mary to be the Mother of God she would have to be God. However the Church does not say Mary is the source of the Divine Nature of the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity. To better understand this let’s look at humanity. Parents give birth to a person, however they are not the author of life, and certainly did not give the child it’s soul. Thus is true with Mary, she did not give Christ His Divine Nature, though she was the Mother of more than just the human form of Christ, because she gave birth to a person, who was God.
Sure Vladimir. Whatever you claim.
What the word conceive means in Greek is different from English. Mary would only would need to provide the womb. John the Baptist said Mat_3:9 And think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father: for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham. In a recent news story of a gay couple paying a woman to rent her womb with some one else’s ovum and one of their sperm The woman is still referred to as mother. In Mathew 1:18 and 20 Mary is referred to as being with child of the Holy Ghost. Mary was indeed Blessed to participate in Gods plan to fulfill the scripture concerning Jesus. If Mary said no would another virgin do? Certainly the Bible is silent on any preparation for Mary other than Gods election.
Because they said so.
What other reason do we need?
That way, I KNOW I can't be wrong.
The Holy Spirit is clear in Scripture in calling Mary *the mother of Jesus*. The phrase *mother of GOD* appears no where in Scripture.
John 2:1 On the third day there was a wedding at Cana in Galilee, and the mother of Jesus was there.
John 2:3 When the wine ran out, the mother of Jesus said to him, “They have no wine.”
Acts 1:14 All these with one accord were devoting themselves to prayer, together with the women and Mary the mother of Jesus, and his brothers.
They always seems like a bunch of lawyers arguing the details of a law, the meaning of the words, the language, the spelling, the dictionaries, the references, the sources...arguing and arguing.
Same stuff, over and over again. Iron rods refusing to bend. Each one right, the other one wrong.
Weird thing is, I'd no sooner open a door to one of those discussions and I’d be sucked in to their whirlpooling circular arguments, each swirling down and around while reaching for the highest authority on the highest authority, and each arguing that they have the Holy Spirit interpreting the Law for them.
I think it’s kinda funny or funny sad and/or sadly ironic to argue the letter of the law like that, since it seems to cancel out the Spirit behind it.
Then, to claim it’s the Spirit making them argue? Lol…it’s just too much.
And damned if I don’t get sucked in too, and then definitely am once I do!
Huh...never knew that about my "self" until I saw it (my self) in action.
Thankfully, I think I finally realized that I’m not a lawyer and don’t like arguing The Law like that, especially not about who best knows Daddy's meaning of “is”.
Then, it hit me. This is exactly the same thing happening on a grand scale in the politics and national dialog of our nation and every other.
We love our own letter of the law and we join and pit one group against the other arguing the meaning of “is” so hard that the spirit that gave “is” meaning is lost.
Then that spirit is replaced by something altogether different, the demon spirit of "The Arguer" bearing some bitter fruit.
Someone with both vision and discernment told me that if you’re quiet, you can hear satan’s laughter in these discussions.
And if you look up, you’ll see Jesus weeping as the arguments cut him again and again, His blood staining His robe all over again, just as when He walked as a man.
That’s an awareness way higher than my energy level and spiritual paygrade, but I’d like to work for my promotion, so it’s back on the trail for this seeking hiker.
Thanks for you concise and accurate syllogism.
I want to especially thank you for introducing the mysterious “hypostatic union” - a concept that we hardly comprehend, I think.
Certainly, I accept “fully God and “fully man” but I don’t even try to make conclusions that are not clearly expressed in God’s Word. To do otherwise is like expecting my dog to explain Higgs Bosen - only much less likely.
Again, thanks!
No direct or categorical and stringent proof of the dogma can be brought forward from Scripture.
“Whatever you claim.”
I made no claims. Everything I said is simply a fact. When you encounter a woman who gave birth to a child conceived inside her who somehow was not a mother of that child you let me know, okay?
“I made no claims. Everything I said is simply a fact.”
Sure Vlad, whatever you claim. It’s false, but whatever. I wish you the best.
Some of your claims:
I'll throw in with aMorePerfectUnion:
- ”I make no claims.”
- ”Everything I said is simply a fact."
- ”So she is the mother of God.”
- ”...He preserved her from sin.”
Whatever.
You might want to read this....
The Immaculate Conception from catholic encyclopedia online:(http://www.catholic.org/encyclopedia/view.php?id=6056)
No direct or categorical and stringent proof of the dogma can be brought forward from Scripture.
To date no catholic can refute this.
But from Our Lady of Lourdes and the mouth of St. Bernadette we have this knowledge.
For the good of those who would like background on the passage in Luke when blessed Elizabeth refers to Mary as the mother of my Lord.
................. quote ..................
Luke 1:43 By “Lord” Elizabeth meant Jesus, not the entire Godhead. Jesus is God, but not all of God is Jesus. Consequently the Bible never ascribes the title “Mother of God” to Mary. She was the mother of Jesus, who was Elizabeth’s Lord, since He was God.
Luke used the title “Lord” 95 times out of its 166 occurrences in the Synoptics.
“The use of kurios in narrative to refer to Jesus is distinctive of Luke.”
This title has a double meaning. It is the word the Septuagint used to translate the Hebrew “Yahweh,” and the New Testament writers used it the same way. As such, it implies deity. It also means “master” in the sense of a superior person, specifically the Messiah.
This usage does not necessarily imply that the person using it believed that Jesus was God. Elizabeth apparently meant that Jesus was the Messiah at least.
Luke evidently used the term “Lord” frequently because for Greek readers “Christ” or “Messiah” had little meaning. The pagan Gentiles referred to Caesar as “Lord” Caesar meaning that he was their divine sovereign. “Lord” had the same connotation for Luke’s original readers. Jesus is the divine sovereign for Christians.
Elizabeth considered herself unworthy that the mother of Messiah should visit her (2 Sam. 24:21; cf. 2 Sam. 6:2–11). She had done nothing to deserve this honor. Her inspired words reflect the superiority of Mary’s child over her own son.
Constable, T. (2003). Tom Constable’s Expository Notes on the Bible (Lk 1:43).
LOL
So this trumps the written Word????
That certainly explains a great deal about catholicism.
It is why Christianity rejects catholic tradition.
It would be funny if it weren’t so sad.
Because they reject the title “Mother of God” — a title which is Christological. It is about the Blessed Mother only in a secondary way; the importance of “Mother of God” is that it tells us who Jesus is. For those who want to know.
What about what the Angel Gabriel said that the Holy Spirit will come over her and the power from on high?
Luke 1 (RSV)
28 And he came to her and said, “Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with you!”
29 But she was greatly troubled at the saying, and considered in her mind what sort of greeting this might be.
30 And the angel said to her, “Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God.
31 And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus.
32 He will be great, and will be called the Son of the Most High; and the Lord God will give to him the throne of his father David,
33 and he will reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there will be no end.”
34 And Mary said to the angel, “How shall this be, since I have no husband?”
35 And the angel said to her, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the child to be born will be called holy, the Son of God.
The truth.
You need catholic.com not .org
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.