| This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies. |
|
Locked on 09/27/2014 9:10:14 AM PDT by Religion Moderator, reason:
Godwin’s Law |
Posted on 09/11/2014 11:19:06 AM PDT by Jan_Sobieski
Pope Francis has been a breath of fresh air for many Catholics seeking greater liberty and a growing concern for conservative Christians who take issue with his comments about homosexuality and other cultural issues.
But the pontiff's latest statement is sparking an uproar from believers around the world. Pope Francis sent a tweet Tuesday that absolutely violates the truth of Scripture:
"The Christian who does not feel that the Virgin Mary is his or her mother is an orphan," Pope Francis tweeted.
As of the time I wrote this column it had been retweeted about 4,000 times and many of the responses were in appropriately unkind. It's not appropriate to attack the pope for his beliefs. It's more appropriate to share the truth...
Yes indeed they do. God calls it an abomination but the Catholic Church says they are beutifull and that Catholics shouldn’t shrink from admitting they are pagan in origin.
If Mary is the mother of God and the Father is God, then Mary is the mother of God the Father.
If Mary is the mother of God and the Holy Spirit is God, then Mary is the mother of God the Holy Spirit.
That puts Mary above the Godhead, makes Mary deity, makes her the mother of God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit, making them created, finite beings with beginning.
It totally messes up all kinds of theology.
Do Catholics EVER think through what they have been spoon fed for their entire lives, cause it sure doesn't look that way with the arguments they use.
I'll stick with agreeing with the Holy Spirit in what He inspired in Scripture: *Mary, the mother of Jesus*.
That way, I KNOW I can't be wrong.
The Holy Spirit is clear in Scripture in calling Mary *the mother of Jesus*.
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.
When told that she was to give birth to a child, she didn’t reply, “That wouldn’t be surprising, since I am young and will soon be married.”
What does the Bible record her as saying?
How can it be since I AM a virgin?
She says NOTHING about remaining a virgin? The only prophecy that was made about the condition of His mother was that Jesus would be born of a virgin, and that happened when Mary gave birth to Jesus.
There is NO prophecy that states that Mary would ever remain a virgin, or needed to remain a virgin.
Once Jesus was born and that prophecy was fulfilled, Mary fulfilled the role for which God chose her and she was free to married and have a normal relationship with Joseph, which included having sex.
And Scripture clearly states that Joseph took Mary AS HIS WIFE but did not know her (have sex) until AFTER she had given birth to Jesus.
There is and was absolutely no reason for Mary to remain a virgin.
Other early documents and Tradition confirm her perpetual virginity.
They *confirm* nothing.
They may state it, but Scripture, being God breathed, states otherwise and says that Mary had other children and Joseph had sex with her after Jesus birth.
Perhaps you have not read Scripture.
Mary of the Bible certainly did have other children...
Psalm69:8 I have become a stranger to my brothers, an alien to my mother's sons.
Matthew 1:24-25 When Joseph woke from sleep, he did as the angel of the Lord commanded him: he took his wife, but knew her not until she had given birth to a son. And he called his name Jesus.
Matthew 12:46-47 “While He was still speaking to the multitudes, behold, His mother “and brothers” were standing outside, seeking to speak to Him. And someone said to Him, “Behold, Your mother and Your brothers are standing outside seeking to speak to You.”
Matthew 13:55 “Is not this the carpenter’s son? Is not His mother called Mary, and ‘His brothers James and Joseph and Simon and Judas?”
Mark 6:2-3 “And when the Sabbath had come, He began to teach in the synagogue; and the many listeners were astonished, saying, “Where did this man get these things, and what is this wisdom given to Him, and such miracles as these performed by His hands?... “Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, and ‘brother of James, and Joses, and Judas, and Simon? Are not ‘His sisters’ here with us?”
John 2:12 “After this He went down to Capernaum, He and His mother, and ‘His brothers’, and His disciples; and there they stayed a few days.”
Acts 1:14 “These all with one mind were continually devoting themselves to prayer, along with the women, and Mary the mother of Jesus, ‘and with His brothers’.”
1 Corinthians 9:4-5 “Do we not have a right to eat and drink? Do we not have a right to take along a believing wife, even as the rest of the apostles, ‘and’ the brothers of the Lord, and Cephas?”
Galatians 1:19 But I did not see any other of the apostles except James, ‘the Lord’s brother’..
Strong's Concordance
adelphos: a brother
Original Word: ἀδελφός, οῦ, ὁ
Part of Speech: Noun, Masculine
Transliteration: adelphos
Phonetic Spelling: (ad-el-fos')
Short Definition: a brother
Definition: a brother, member of the same religious community, especially a fellow-Christian.
Strong's Concordance
http://biblehub.com/greek/80.htm
adelphos: a brother
Original Word: ἀδελφός, οῦ, ὁ
Part of Speech: Noun, Masculine
Transliteration: adelphos
Phonetic Spelling: (ad-el-fos')
Short Definition: a brother
Definition: a brother, member of the same religious community, especially a fellow-Christian.
Here is a link to the occurrences of the Greek word *adelphos*.
http://biblehub.com/greek/80.htm
The word *sister* (adelphe) in the Greek is the same.
http://biblehub.com/greek/79.htm
The word used is *brother* not *cousin*.
It can't mean a member of the same religious community in the context in which they occur, because then that would mean every man in Israel could be identified as Jesus' brother. So that would not identify Jesus as anyone in particular's brother.
It's not going to mean *brother in Christ* as that concept was not yet in place and the Jews, who knew Jesus as a Jew and knew His brothers as Jews, would not even begin to understand the new birth and what being in Christ meant.
They didn't even understand who JESUS was, much less being a *brother in Christ*.
The only definition left then, is to mean physical brother.
And it would not be *cousin*.
The word for *relative* that is used for Elizabeth is *suggenes*, not *adelphe*.
http://biblehub.com/greek/4773.htm
Strong's Concordance
suggenes: akin, a relative
Original Word: συγγενής, ές
Part of Speech: Adjective
Transliteration: suggenes
Phonetic Spelling: (soong-ghen-ace')
Short Definition: akin, a relative
Definition: akin to, related; subst: fellow countryman, kinsman.
I won’t read those. I know that men are fallable. I pray for a right understanding of God’s Word.
Instead of paying so much attention (as you do) to what men say and falling so easily into error, do what the Bereans did when Paul came to them with the Truth- the gospel.
“Now the Bereans were of more noble character than the Thessalonians, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true. Many of the Jews believed, as did also a number of prominent Greek women and many Greek men.”
Study! To show yourself approved to God-— RIGHTLY dividing the Word.
Like the Greeks, you have a problem putting all your intellectual pride aside. (1 Cor 1 and 2)
You love the things you’ve read and been told but have you examined all that in light of Scripture?
I’ve seen enough of your posts to conclude that you are ignorant- not stupid, but uninformed.
Further, you have been led astray. And you are leading others astray. For that, you will be held accountable, if in deed you are saved.
I do not judge the latter point. God will.
<< If Mary is the mother of God and the Father is God, then Mary is the mother of God the Father.>>
This premise is false. It stems from a misunderstanding of the Trinity, what is known as Sabellianism.
Jesus is the second person of the Trinity, therefore he is God. He is also the Son of Mary. Therefore Mary is not the mother of the Father, but of the Son. The Son of God pre-existed with the Father, yet from the beginning of time God in his plan of salvation included the birth of the Son of God through Mary.
Since God is outside of time this is no problem.
>>Do Catholics EVER think through what they have been spoon fed for their entire lives, cause it sure doesn’t look that way with the arguments they use.<<<
Do you have a degree in Theology? Have you studied the history of the Bible, the developments of doctrine in the Church?
To be the Mother of Jesus is to be the Mother of God, since it is impossible to separate one person from his nature. Jesus is both Divine and Man. He is not two persons. To say otherwise means that God “adopted” (see. Adoptionism) a human man, and merely used him as like a mask or a puppet.
This is not salvation of mankind, it does not assume the humanity of man into the divine nature. It therefore does not act as a sufficient vessel of expiation.
I have an MA in Theology. You seem to be accusing others of what you are prescribing...Sabellianism. Christotokos is a much more accurate description than Theotokos, and Mary was not Immaculately Conceived. Don’t be a “dunce” (Duns Scotus) ;-)
Yes they are the same person...The bible in one place tells us that God created the heavens and earth and in another it tells us that Jesus created the heavens and the earth...
That is the mystery that the Catholic religion missed...The Trinity is One, but yet it is Three...
NO!
God has no mother.
GOD is without beginning and without end.
He is the Ancient of Days, without mother or father.
The Son of God was born of Mary as Jesus.
Mary is the mother of Jesus as the Holy Spirit tells us in Scripture.
She is NOT the mother of the Godhead, which is what saying that Mary, is the mother of God says.
Words mean things and it the Holy Spirit intended to tell us that Mary was the mother of God, He would have had it recorded in Scripture as such. He doesn't. The Holy Spirit deliberately and clearly calls Mary *mother of Jesus*.
She was the mother of the incarnation of the Son, not the mother of the Son Himself, not the mother of His Deity.
Mind reading again?
The Bible says, "Love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who spitefully use you, and persecute you, that you may be sons of your Father in heaven"
~Matthew 5:44-45.
Your point is?
I’m praying for you.
I am sharing the truth of Scripture with those who are in error about it.
That is showing love and doing good to those who oppose the clear teaching of Scripture.
So how am I your enemy?
You and I are going to have to disagree here.
God is a Trinity.
While it is true that there is an inasciable nature to the origin of the three persons in the Trinity. It is not true that this precludes the reality, that an earthly brith of Jesus (who is God the second person) means God was created by Mary.
That is false, the title of Mary as “Mother of God” is there besides the reality of the origin of the persons of the trinity.
You are getting hung up on the idea that to be a Mother is to bring about the creation of a thing. That is not motherhood.
Only God creates a soul for example. To be a mother does not actually mean to be the sole-origin of a person.
One can be a “mother” of an adopted Child. One can also be a surrogate mother. The humanity of Christ had to come from Mary. Since his humanity is fully and not partially united to his divinity (by necessity for salvation of all humanity), Mary bore the Son of God.
Further, to be “God bearer” (theotokos, which you would understand the meaning of if you’ve studied this) does not imply begetting of the essence of God. It implies the necessary communication between the two natures God and Man in one person Jesus Christ.
Thus when Jesus acts to die on the cross both his Human and divine natures are through the action of one person. His humanity dies and this act is done in unity with his divinity.
Otherwise, his atonement is merely the act of a man and not God.
Why would God die on the cross? Why would God be born of a woman? To accept one and deny the other is incomprehensible. God came into the world and God died in it, or else God did neither of those things and our faith is in vain.
Sebellianism does not enter into it. Your use of Dunsmen is a red herring. We’re talking about Theotokos, and not the immaculate conception.
There are plenty of resources and studies out there (even on the internet) of why the Catholics see this as entirely plausible and in fact biblical.
Saying that Mary is the mother of God is saying a different thing than saying that Mary is the mother of Jesus.
Your disagreement is with the Holy Spirit then as HE is the one who calls Mary *mother of Jesus* in the Scripture that He inspired and breathed out, never referring to her as *mother of God*.
The Catholic church is wrong and guilty of the sin of presumption that they like to accuse others of so much, in presuming to correct what the Holy Spirit inspired as not being adequate or accurate.
The Holy Spirit did not need them to come along and correct something He revealed as if He didn’t do a good enough job of revealing it in the first place.
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.