Some people think their truth is more important than THE Truth!
"I'm gonna tell mommy!"
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.
Some people think their truth is more important than THE Truth!
"I'm gonna tell mommy!"
Oh good grief. To the RM.....again....really? Some catholics are thin skinned to be sure.
LOL!
This is where Protestants start getting nervous about Mary theology. The emphasis should be on Jesus, not Mary or any other. John the Baptist, who also had a very important role as the last of the prophets, the proclaimer of the Messiah, realized his secondary role when he stated "He must increase, I must decrease" (John 3:30). In Luke 11:27, Jesus deflected praise away from Mary which calls to question exactly how important was her role. Why take the scenic by-pass through Mary when you can take the direct expressway to Jesus?
She is important. All generations will call her blessed. The bible reveals that when Jesus’ other followers had fled, that His mom was still there for him. There at every point of conception, life, death, burial, resurrection.
Is Mary important? Yes and no, IMO. Mary had an important role and like others who also had important roles in God's redemptive plan, should be honored. However, like John the Baptist and others, her role is over. Salvation is through her son, not Mary. A Gospel presentation can be done without ever mentioning Mary - see Paul's statement in 1 Corinthians 15.
She was an amazing woman. I have no doubt that Jesus deeply loved His mom.
No disagreement here.
If you don’t agree, just say you don’t.
“Yet I have told the truth here. Are you accusing personally me of subverting truthfulness and telling falsehoods?”
I do not believe “you told the truth here.” That may be your intent. I cannot read your mind.
I am not “accusing” you or anyone. I am saying that when you string facts together in a way that distorts the meaning, you are creating a beautiful falsehood.
Do you have to make it personal. Can we discuss this objectively, without it being about you?
I know I did, at one time in my life.
Christ started the Catholic Church, none other.
The bulk of the NT has little to do with Mary. After a brief mention in Acts 1, she disappears from the story.
But not the roman catholic church as there’s no pope, worship of Mary, indulgences, etc until corruption set in later on.
BTW, thank you for the thorough post.
“5. If each person of the Trinity can be addressed as God, then Mary is the mother of God, that is, the incarnate 2nd person of the Trinity. She is not the mother of the Father or of the Holy Spirit, or even of the pre-incarnate 2nd person of the Trinity.” Well said, Sir. Mary is not the Mother of the Father or the Holy Spirit, or even the pre-incarnate Christ.
Did the pre-incarnate 2nd person of the Trinity cease to exist (who was not Mary's son) when the incarnate 2nd person of the Trinity showed up???
How did Jesus change from not being the son of Mary to being the son of Mary??? And if he didn't, there must have been another Jesus...
Since before Creation Jesus/God never had a mother...Never needed one...And he stil doesn't...
It's like you guys don't understand why Jesus had to be born of a human woman...It certainly wasn't to have a mother to venerate...Jesus never even called her mother, or mom...He called her woman...
Jesus wasn't born of a woman so he could have a mediator between man and God...That's Jesus' role...Jesus wasn't born of a woman so he would have a mother to be the head of a church....
Mary was the human vessel God used to become a human...That's it...
Jesus had to become a fallen man thru a fallen woman to accomplish his purpose...
Ummm, nope. Elizabeth was Mary's cousin, not her mother.
Mary's mother is St. Anne (here's a link to an NON-Catholic site with information of Mary's mother, since the Catholic bashers on this thread continually insist that "the Catholics" made up this stuff, when in reality ALL of Christendom proclaimed it early on in Christianity: http://orthodoxwiki.org/Joachim_and_Anna )
The only "logic" on this thread from people objecting to the basic Christian doctrine that Jesus was God when he was in Mary's womb are making bizarrely illogical arguments with "logic" that would conclude:
President Obama's mother must be "greater" than the President, and he must have gotten his presidency from her, since she's accepted as the President's mother (and not merely "Barack Obama's mother").
A fireman's mother must have existed "before there were firemen", since she's recognized as the mother of one.
Angie Jolie must have "created" her Cambodian son that she adopted, she since is universally accepted as his mother.
In short, none of the "logic" objecting to the use of the term "Mother of God" is used in the real world for any motherhood. Contining to make up straw man arguments whose "logic" falls apart in when applied to any other situation isn't helping their cause.
Wrong again. Mormonism does not use the title "Mother of God" at all, and the Mormon belief about Mary is FAR closer to Protestantism than Catholicism. (see http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2011/sep/08/mormons-mary-christians )
Mormons and Protestants agree that Mary is not special, sinned like everyone, should NOT be venerated and is just an ordinary women chosen to be the vessel to bring Jesus into the world. This Mormon/Protestant teaching (which came about in the 1600s for protestants and the 1800s for Mormons) is very far removed from early Christianity, which never taught that.
The main difference between Mormon and Protestant theology on Mary is that Mormons make the bizzaro claim that God the Father had sex with the Virgin Mary and impregnated her with Jesus (similar to Greek mythology on Hercules). Protestants, on the other hand, pretty much accept the traditional account of a miraculous pregnancy and virgin birth. I guess they think God the Father played Eeny-meeny-miny-moe and picked out some random woman for this extraordinary task.
You can keep repeating the faces-in-the-clouds metaphor all you want, but unless you cite the SPECIFIC Scripture passages Staples discusses, and show EXACTLY HOW he is misinterpreting them, you are merely making gratuitous assertions.
And the principle is: What is gratuitously asserted may be gratuitously denied.
Here is where you can get the book you are afraid to read:
Place maker
Can you cite a specific verse that clearly says Mary was without sin.....or she was an eternal virgin.....or that she was assumed?
What seminary did staples attend? Did he graduate? What specifically are his qualifications in this area that you place so much faith in?
You cite the liberal Guardian as your source.....a newspaper article?? LOL!
This is true. Provided with a perfect opportunities to elevate Mary even to a small degree that Catholicism does beyond what is written - which simply presents Mary as a holy reverent, worshipful Spirit-filled surrendered instrument of God - the Lord did not but equated all who likewise did the Father's will to being like His mother.
While he yet talked to the people, behold, his mother and his brethren stood without, desiring to speak with him. Then one said unto him, Behold, thy mother and thy brethren stand without, desiring to speak with thee. But he answered and said unto him that told him, Who is my mother? and who are my brethren? And he stretched forth his hand toward his disciples, and said, Behold my mother and my brethren! For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother. (Matthew 12:46-50)
And it came to pass, as he spake these things, a certain woman of the company lifted up her voice, and said unto him, Blessed is the womb that bare thee, and the paps which thou hast sucked. But he said, Yea rather, blessed are they that hear the word of God, and keep it. (Luke 11:27-28)
Note that to be consistent with what pervades in Catholicism the Lord in the first instance would have left immediately to give heed to Mary, or at least it would be recorded that He therefore left the people to hear His mother, or said something that prioritized Mary. But instead of making it clear that Mary had a special priority as His Mother, as well as His brethren, the Lord reacts by asking "who is my mother, and who are my brethren," and answering it by declaring all who did the will of His Father in Heaven were His mother and brethren.
In so doing it is the Father in Heaven that is exalted, while Mary is placed with all His other brethren who did His will, which is how Mary became the mother of the incarnated Son of God.
Likewise in the second instance the consistent with Catholicism the Lord would have affirmed something like, "Yea, Mary is indeed blessed above all women, and blessed are all who hear the word of God, and keep it."
Note that the word "rather" (menounge) in Lk. 1:28 can mean "indeed" (Rm. 10:18; Phil. 3:8) (but "nay" in Rm. 9:20 KJV) though even the Douay-Rheims has "yes, rather" here, but which still does not render Mary to being blessed above women, but instead the Lord is careful to state that all who hear the word of God and keep it are also blessed.
Note also that Scripture nowhere says that Mary is blessed above women, though some Caths wrongly render Lk. 1:28,42 to say, and it is also said of another mother,
Blessed above women shall Jael the wife of Heber the Kenite be, blessed shall she be above women in the tent. (Judges 5:24)
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.