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.
We are not talking about CHRISTIANS. We are talking about JEWS.
I was baptized in the swimming pool at Bien Hoa Air Base, Republic of Vietnam, in 1970.
Perhaps you remember this: Mine eyes haven't seen, nor my ears heard, what the Father has in store.
The word grace used in this passage in Luke is used in one other place in the Bible and that is Ephesians 1 where Paul is us that with this same grace, God has blessed us (believers) in the Beloved. IOW, we all have access to that grace and it has been bestowed on us all.
http://biblehub.com/greek/5487.htm
Luke 1:28 And he came to her and said, “Greetings, O favored one, the Lord is with you!”
Ephesians 1:4-6 In love he predestined us for adoption as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will, to the praise of his glorious grace, with which he has blessed us in the Beloved.
Greek word “grace”
charitoó: to make graceful, endow with grace
Original Word: χαριτόω
Part of Speech: Verb
Transliteration: charitoó
Phonetic Spelling: (khar-ee-to'-o)
Short Definition: I favor, bestow freely on
Definition: I favor, bestow freely on.
HELPS Word-studies
Cognate: 5487 xaritóō (from 5486 /xárisma, "grace," see there) – properly, highly-favored because receptive to God's grace. 5487 (xaritóō) is used twice in the NT (Lk 1:28 and Eph 1:6), both times of God extending Himself to freely bestow grace (favor).
Word Origin: from charis
Definition: to make graceful, endow with grace
NASB Translation: favored (1), freely bestowed (1).
We're trying by posting Scripture but by virtue of the fact that you persist in holding your position, it's not working.
Are you telling us then that Christians don't have to obey the Law?
Sheesh... the next thing you'll hear will be some bunk that Mary is a conduit of grace for salvation and an intercessor for mankind...
Oh, wait....
Hoss
Yet catholics continue to insist Mary was sinless in contradiction of the Word.
Ritual or offering for sin?
See Leviticus 12:1-8. Pay special attention to verse 6.
Was the OT not covered in seminary?
Why Millions of Muslims are Seeing Apparitions of the Mother Mary...
Jesus is God.
Mary is the mother of God.
There you go again.
How about using the same reasoning, we apply that to God the Father;
God is the Creator, the Great I AM (as the Creator identified Himself to Moses).
Mary is Mother of the Creator (who is God the Father) Mother of the Incarnate Christ, and Mother of the Holy Spirit too!
metmon is correct when she notes that within the Scripture, Mary is not given the title Mother of God, but instead is identified as mother of Jesus, who came to be also referred to in early Christian church tradition as the Incarnation of Christ.
Can you now see why the term Theotokos does not translate straight across as "mother of God", but rather more precisely as God Bearer?
In Greek language, Latin, and I believe Hebrew also, there are words which do translate as "mother", and were thus available for using as precise wording in regards to Mary's own role, if the early church were to have sought that to that terminology.
Yet they did not, in fact it must be recognized that the early church studiously avoided adoption of the EXACT term "Mother of God".
Those words were not chosen at what many today refer to as the first church Council, but instead a new term was coined, Theotkos, which translate to us as God Bearer, instead of coming up with Greek language term which used μητρὸς if the intent was to unreservedly identify Mary as quote-unqoute, Mother of God.
You did ask why so-called "Protestants" do not accept the identifying terminology which you and others have been obstinately demanding must be accepted.
Your having said that the Scripture was "crystal clear" on the subject was inaccurate, an as used was misleading. (I can only assume that was done on purpose).
If it were to have been such a simple matter, there would have been no real need for a few early Christians to have come up with the term Theotokos, doing so while also so utterly (figuratively) bashing Nestorius as they did (desiring to do so literally, physically also) causing one of the earliest significant splitting up of the Church.
May I ask;
I see I misspelled the word Theotokos, along with having allowed to slip by, some other minor poor editing.
Your syllogism is invalid. Undistributed middle.
Mary made a sin-offering because it was mandated in the Law. Doing so was not a profession of personal sin. FAILING to do so WOULD have been a sin.
Attempting to make this passage into evidence for Mary’s sinfulness is abuse of Scripture. There is no basis for the assertion that this passage was intended by the author to answer that question.
Nice try....but Leviticus makes it clear this is a sin offering.
Really, Before you "knew man" you were overshadowed by the Holy Spirit, and give birth to the Christ child? Funny I don't recall seeing any mention of that on the news.
So now muslims are approving of Mary?
And next Catholicism, I suppose.
Do you really want to be part of something muslims approve of?
Ask Paul.
He wrote Ephesians under the inspiration from the Holy Spirit.
If the Holy Spirit tells us that we have the same grace, I’m not going to argue.
And of course, the argument about her being graced is not in regard to her simply being chosen to bear Jesus, but it’s a matter of Catholics using that verse to claim that she is sinless.
But I suspect that you already knew that.
Thus I consider your show of naivety to be specious at best.
Catholics and agnostics like to say ‘God can do anything’ in order to leave a gapping hole in reason into which they pour their magic thinking. We see it in abundance on this thread, with the elevation of Mary to demi-goddess by claiming she is the mother of a third of the Trinity of God. Such false reasoning gives the magic thinkers a big hole into which they can pour all manner of heresy with a seared conscience. Perhaps the inability to see the faulty reasoning is why they remain perishing in catholiciism? Perhaps they are so far lost that they cannot pull back from the plunge the demonic has pushed them into?
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.