Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: nanetteclaret; Springfield Reformer
As I replied in my other post, this doctrine was decided at the Council of Ephesus in 431 AD to combat the heresy of Nestorianism which said that Christ was 2 persons and that Mary was the bearer of Him in His humanity only. Saying that divided Him into 2 persons. If she was the bearer of His humanity only, where was His divine nature during that time? If you say that it was just waiting around for Him to be born, then you’ve got 4 persons: God the Father, the Holy Spirit, Jesus the man, and Jesus God.

That entire statement is nonsense and does nothing to furher your cause...Of course Mary was the bearer of the divine nature of Jesus (she carried him abound making her the bearer)...Nestorius never said Jesus was 2 persons...One person with two natures...

What's comical is that you guys throw around the phrase, 'Nestorianism is heretical' so often that people don't really know what Nestorianism is but just fall in line against it because your relgion calls it a heresy...

Anti-Nestorianism has one function and one focus; to elevate Mary to the mother of God...

When Jesus died on the Cross, the bible tells us his spirit went to heaven and Jesus laid in the tomb while Jesus went to the center of the earth...Kind of hard to picture a dead human Jesus travelling to the center of the earth...

Your religion doesn't think things thru too much...

136 posted on 02/04/2015 12:12:33 AM PST by Iscool
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies ]


To: Iscool

***the bible tells us his spirit went to heaven and Jesus laid in the tomb while Jesus went to the center of the earth.***

Please give me those verses. I am not being snarky, I really want to know because I have not been able to find them in the Gospels.


214 posted on 02/04/2015 8:15:07 AM PST by nanetteclaret (Unreconstructed "Elderly Kooky Type" Catholic Texan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 136 | View Replies ]

To: Iscool; nanetteclaret; Springfield Reformer
Your religion doesn't think things thru too much...

Haha well, let's just see what our "poor thinking", according to you, has produced:

From here: Nestorianism

We have no difficulty in defining the doctrine of Nestorius so far as words are concerned: Mary did not bring forth the Godhead as such (true) nor the Word of God (false), but the organ, the temple of the Godhead. The man Jesus Christ is this temple, "the animated purple of the King", as he expresses it in a passage of sustained eloquence. The Incarnate God did not suffer nor die, but raised up from the dead him in whom He was incarnate. The Word and the Man are to be worshipped together, and he adds: dia ton phorounta ton phoroumenon sebo (Through Him that bears I worship Him Who is borne). If St. Paul speaks of the Lord of Glory being crucified, he means the man by "the Lord of Glory". There are two natures, he says, and one person; but the two natures are regularly spoken of as though they were two persons, and the sayings of Scripture about Christ are to be appropriated some of the Man, some to the Word. If Mary is called the Mother of God, she will be made into a goddess, and the Gentiles will be scandalized.

...It will probably be only just to Nestorius to admit that he fully intended to safeguard the unity of subject in Christ. But he gave wrong explanations as to the unity, and his teaching logically led to two Christs, though he would not have admitted the fact. Not only his words are misleading, but the doctrine which underlies his words is misleading, and tends to destroy the whole meaning of the Incarnation. It is impossible to deny that teaching as well as wording which leads to such consequences as heresy. He was therefore unavoidably condemned. He reiterated the same view twenty years later in the "Bazaar of Heraclides", which shows no real change of opinion, although he declares his adherence to the Tome of St. Leo

It is for these reasons, especially those in bold, that his work was condemned heretical. Words mean things and unless the dogma (of the Trinity) is made clear, and all logical consequences thereof are rigorously defended, then the potential to slip back into old heresies remains. This is why Nestorius was condemned. Not because what he taught was antithetical to the dogma of the Trinity, but because the way he taught it (explained it) wrt Christ's personhood, it left it (the dogma of the Trinity) open to misunderstanding and therefore heretical interpretation. The fact he didn't recant on this point is a testiment to his pride, not a "political persecution". He was too proud in his work to disallow any correction to his explainations of Christ's personhood.

This is actually an excellent example of how titles given to Mary actually are educative about her son Jesus, and thus don't make her into some kind of "goddess" as Nestorius (and others here) feared and fear today. They (the titles) help describe her son more perfectly, thus glorify God, not Mary. Which is how it can be reasonably said that devotion to Mary is devotion to Christ because in every way, she points to Him.

291 posted on 02/13/2015 9:02:57 AM PST by FourtySeven (47)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 136 | 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