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.
The following is also a valid syllogism, which proves that anyone who denies that Mary is the mother of God also denies that Jesus is God:
Mary is the mother of Jesus.
Mary is not the mother of God.
Therefore, Jesus is not God.
All you have proven is that you have no clue what the science of Logic is about.
“All you have proven is that you have no clue what the science of Logic is about.”
You embarrass yourself in posting that Arthur.
You are using a category mistake of logic and fail at what you are trying to condemn others for.
You assign a title to Mary that God doesn’t give, demonstrating you need more time in the wonderful Scriptures.
Nobody ever said, “Mary created God”.
That’s quite a stretch. As a matter of fact, your mother did not even create you.
Pax
“The following is also a valid syllogism, which proves that anyone who denies that Mary is the mother of God also denies that Jesus is God:
“Mary is the mother of Jesus.
Mary is not the mother of God.
Therefore, Jesus is not God.
..................................
Arthur, please don’t continue down this path. It is not a valid syllogism because it assumes a category that doesn’t not apply to Christ and then attempts to give Mary a title God never gave her.
Mary bore Jesus Christ. Bore his human nature. Bore his divine nature.
Mary didn’t conceive his divine nature. He preexisted from all eternity as God.
Mary was blessed among women. Not above women.
What God said is enough.
“Nobody ever said, “Mary created God”.”
Yes, they do. It is an attempt to make dear Mary into more than God Himself did.
Mary bore Christ. It is the truth and it is enough.
God called her blessed. It is the truth and it is enough.
You both claim to be Orthodox, but you two seem to disagree on Mary being the Mother of God.
What’s up with that?
Prove it. Where did any Catholic say Mary created God.
Mary is the mother of Jesus.
Jesus is God.
It is the truth and it is enough; but most Prots appear to reject those truths.
Sigh, generally these discussions seem to break down along a few miscommunications, overreactions, and sometimes an actual theological disagreement.
Protestants tend to be uncomfortable calling Mary the mother of God believing this denigrates the honor due to God alone or places Mary in a position greater than God. Catholics see this as an overreaction- a mother gives birth to a person, not a nature.
Some protestants seem to go further, seeming to believe that Jesus is two persons with two natures and that Mary is only the mother of the human person. Catholics recognize this as Nestorianism which was condemned in the 400’s if memory serves.
Using the term Godbearer is a nice phrase- I doubt many Protestants would have a problem with that. If one does disagree with the phrase Godbrare, then they probably really are Nestorians. Makes for a nice theological test I suppose.
One point that Catholics often fail to make is that Catholics believe that Jesus existed as the Son of God before he was concieved, from all eternity in fact. If they don’t understand that, then chalk it up to crappy catechesis inthe 60s to present day.
Finally, Catholics tend to not make the point that we believe mothers (and fathers generally, but not in this case) assist God in the creation of a new body with which God joins a soul. A Catholic would say that protestants elevate the word mother too much (well maybe some Italian Catholics and Jews do too ;).
Sometimes I get the feeling that some people believe Jesus has to have an entirely separate set of DNA from Mary in order to be God. An honest Catholic would say thats possible but we don’t know and the Church doesn’t have a stated position. One problem with that line of thinking (unintended pun) is that Jesus is to be in the line of David. Legally he is through Joseph and Mary, but biologically he could only be through Mary. Interestingly to me, and unknown until the last century, all of the DNA needed to create a human male (biologically) can be found in a human female (just have to snip off and rearrange one of the X chromosomes). A miracle to be sure, but short work for God. Interesting to ponder on.
If you think that’s something, just wait until they have enough support for the fifth marion dogma. It’s just a matter of time though before another false teaching becomes roman catholic dogma.
Jesus IS God. You cannot separate the two. It is a basic tenet of Christianity. Therefore, to say, "neither God nor Jesus ARE" is illogical.
Perhaps you meant "Neither God the Father nor Jesus are simple".
Mary is the mother of a person, Jesus, who is God and man. He was also 5’10” and 180 lbs.
That person is ONE person, not two, or three, or four.
Therefore, by being the mother of Jesus, Mary is simultaneously the mother of a person who is 5’10”, and the mother of a person who is 180 lbs, and the mother of a person who is a man, and the mother of a person who is God.
The title “Mother of God” NEVER meant that Mary pre-existed, conceived, or caused the existence of, the eternal, Triune God. The reason the title NEVER meant that was that the Christians who call Mary by that title are not idiots.
The ONLY way Mary is NOT the mother of God is if the person Jesus who is man is NOT the same person Jesus who is God.
“Prove it. Where did any Catholic say Mary created God.”
Really? how about we just get to the point...
Why don’t you come out and admit that God Himself never Gave Mary that title, but it is a human addition to Scripture.
“Mary is the mother of Jesus.
Protestants agree.
“Jesus is God.
Protestants agree.
“It is the truth and it is enough; but most Prots appear to reject those truths.”
Hundreds of millions of Christians also understand that God never called Mary the “mother of God.” We believe everything God said about Mary and nothing man-made.
So I’m just asking where the title Mother of G-d came from and what does it mean. To me it appears that Mary is the mother of G-d which elevates her higher and is worshiped as such.
Arthur,
“He was also 5’10” and 180 lbs.”
You’re into the Sacramental wine again!
“The ONLY way Mary is NOT the mother of God is if the person Jesus who is man is NOT the same person Jesus who is God.”
We will continue to disagree. I won’t give Mary a title God Himself never does.
Why do you suppose God left out that title Arthur?
Why do you suppose some people are so eager to give her the title God never did?
Do you believe Mary to be the Queen of Heaven? A yes or no answer will suffice.
Of course I do not know Jesus exact height and weight. My point is that he is SOME height and SOME weight.
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.