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.
Uhhhhh, who made up that 30's group that you are a member of???Navigators, is it???
It is astonishing how many people have been poisoned with hatred of Mary, to such as extent that they can look at a formally valid syllogism, and declare it invalid. Or they can look at a declaration in the gospel that Mary is the mother of God—”Who am I that the mother of my Lord should come to me?”—and deny that it is saying any such thing.
John 1:1 will cover it I believe.
See how easy it is to find ALL of your answers in the Word?
To begin with D is invalid, as one person being God does not make him the Trinity. Nor does being the mother of a member of Congress make her the mother of Congress. God is a Trinity, and while Jesus is rightly called God as He is indeed God by nature, yet could not be God alone.
And which illustrates the problem with the uncritical use of the phrase, "Mother of God," which too easily conveys ontologically begetting Divinity. As much as you may want to avoid Mary being inferred to be the mother of the Trinity, the popular abundant use of MOG easily infers Mary as at least being some sort of Divine goddess, and the protest against MOG cannot be separated from the hyper hyperdulia ascribed to her.
As i have said, what Ratzinger said about the use of the term " Co-redemptrix" that it "departs to too great an extent from the language of Scripture and of the Fathers and therefore gives rise to misunderstandings,” applies to MOG as regards the language of Scripture.
Instead of saying anyone is the mother of God, Scripture even adds "as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen" (Romans 9:5) when stating that Christ came out of Israel.
And as concerns the logic of the polemic "if Mary is the mother of Jesus, and if Jesus is God, then Mary is the Mother of God," one could say that since the Jews (standing for us) killed Christ, and Christ is God, then... Technically allowed with equivocation, but you see the problem. Also, CARM states ,
There is a sense in which the syllogism is true but also another in which it is not. Let's take a look.
A syllogism is a set of premises with a conclusion. Here is their syllogism about Mary . . .
Within this syllogism is the fallacy of equivocation. This fallacy occurs when a word or words change meaning in the usage of an argument.
Upon this Rock I will build My church....sounds Catholic to me.
He, not you, determines what sin is. Can the president divulge secret information....no, because if he divulges something, he has declared it non secret....same with God, if He does it, it isn't sin.
That was obvious when it was first posted... here we are 1,000 posts later.
Do you think he/she will stop trying?
No. Neither do I.
You really missed a lot of catechism classes didn't you???....which statement was false????.....I didn't think so.
Well, what do they know?
Who cares??
How nice, that you are so easily amused. LOL
Below may be where the catholic is getting this from.
I've often wondered why roman catholics are so insistent on this. I do not think they realize what they are saying and how they are being duped.
The salutation of the angel Gabriel -- chaire kecharitomene , Hail, full of grace ( Luke 1:28 ) indicates a unique abundance of grace, a supernatural, godlike state of soul, which finds its explanation only in the Immaculate Conception of Mary. www.catholicencyclopedia - immaculateconception
As I said before, the proof is there, non-Catholics choose not to see it.
Wow....I’ve seen doubling down before in discussions; but you take the prize on this one.
When you find Christ giving into every demand to explicitly say what was He made manifest to them then so will I. Until then you must do as He expected them to so, which is to look at what was said and done and realize that I told you that I believe the Jesus is God the Son, thus sending you to a link to my web page (which site is plainly listed on my home page) which i explicitly said was "affirming Jesus Christ is God the Son."
Then came the Jews round about him, and said unto him, How long dost thou make us to doubt? If thou be the Christ, tell us plainly. Jesus answered them, I told you, and ye believed not: the works that I do in my Father's name, they bear witness of me. (John 10:24-25)
Christ requires seeking, which evidences one is worthy to receive Truth, and prepares the heart to appreciate it, and would not be made a puppet to submit to man's un-reasonable demands.
your question pointing to your own blog was inconclusive.
Then if you think "Did you not see the link i provided affirming Jesus Christ is God the Son?" is inconclusive that it is a case of blindness, or laziness or just insolence. Pick you poison, i am done with trying to make you see the obvious.
Never used the word amused, I said, I said interesting. Amuse means with out thought "A" "muse" This is something most non-Catholics are guilty of. On the other hand interesting means that thought is required. You will find this in the majority of Catholic responses, but almost none of the non-Catholic.
Catholics must double down on the truth.
Probably, Catholic clergy actually get an extensive education in theology....unlike some who get their credentials from an on line diploma mill....
because we actually believe that Jesus is God.....don't you??
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.