And ---
- Is this --->
your ride?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.
Now stay alert for a second or two while I show you something about your reasoning ...
You have (rightly) taken something from a later time frame and applied it to an earlier time frame (Grace to Mary is sourced from a later event in her son's lifetime). God has ALL of Time open before Him at all times.
Now apply that same reasoning to what Elizabeth said when she spoke of 'the Mother of her Lord'. The Lordship could just as easily be understood as sourced from an event which had not yet occurred in Elizabeth's timeline but which is absolutely going to happen because it is God's plan of Grace!
The Word pre-existed even the worlds of the Universe. That Word came into a human person named Jesus of Nazareth, as ALWAYS the plan of God. You have zero evidence to support that Presence was present during the gestation of the body of Jesus, but you have assumed it in a way specious to the Plan of God since the Word of God says 'You are my Son, This day have I begotten thee'. The Mormons take that phrase to me God had intimate relations with Mary, to conceive Jesus in her womb. A blasphemous assertion we would both agree.
So, apply the TRUTH that a thing already is if God plans it, even if it has not yet occurred on the Earth's timeline ... 'he rejoiced to see My day' should be a big clue for us!
The reason I conjecture you will reject this offering to you is because it removes one of the duplicitous positions of catholiciism which allows raising Mary to a status The Word does not show us.
I sense avoidance, and diversionary tactic. Anything but full and honest examination of Marionism, it's origins and sources, and the theological implications of that same.
We all know that's what has been going on from the very beginning of this thread, and was included within the underlying motivation for it having been posted here on FR. As if we really needed it HERE on this forum.
Why continue to deny what is so utterly, painfully obvious?
And ---
your ride?So a non-Catholic is telling a Catholic to engage in Necromancy? That seems terribly hypocritical.
If the Holy Spirit tells us that we have the same grace, I’m not going to argue.
He wrote 1 Corinthians under the inspiration from the Holy Spirit.
If the Holy Spirit tells us that the Bread and wine become the Body and Blood of Jesus who am I to argue.
1 Corinthians 11:26-29: For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until He comes.Therefore whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner, shall be guilty of the body and the blood of the Lord.But a man must examine himself, and in so doing he is to eat of the bread and drink of the cup.For those who eat and drink without discerning the body of Christ eat and drink judgment on themselves.
I received from the Lord that which I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus in the night in which He was betrayed took bread; 24and when He had given thanks, He broke it and said, “This is My body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of Me.” 25In the same way He took the cup also after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in My blood; do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of Me.” 26For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until He comes. 27Therefore whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner, shall be guilty of the body and the blood of the Lord. 28But a man must examine himself, and in so doing he is to eat of the bread and drink of the cup. 29For he who eats and drinks, eats and drinks judgment to himself if he does not judge the body rightly. 30For this reason many among you are weak and sick, and a number sleep. 31But if we judged ourselves rightly, we would not be judged. 32But when we are judged, we are disciplined by the Lord so that we will not be condemned along with the world.
You are wrong. You were provided scriptural evidence in context.
If that were the case, is the Word then considered milk and does it turn to milk when we read it?
Once again; you try to put words into my mouth.
WHY?
Are you telling me that ROME has decided; all on it's own; NOT to follow Jewish law?
You're dating yourself Buffalo Bob...
So she WAS a SINNER before she recieived grace; RIGHT?
HE created Satan.
Like Mary?
Do not allow anti-Protestantism to be a stumbling block.
The Catholic church, which is the ONLY organization on Earth originated by Christ has the sole authority to interpret the Bible and the ONLY infallible teaching authority ever....They have determined, and teach, that Mary was assumed into Heaven....I'll buy that.
Oh...
...there are LOTS of things going on that I don’t know about!
...there are LOTS of things going on that I don't know about!
Why Millions of Muslims are Seeing Apparitions of the Mother Mary...
Because they've already bought into one lie and another one won't ping their radar?
Show your work
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.