Posted on 07/01/2017 5:31:11 PM PDT by marshmallow
Uhh... because of people like you?
Yet she is never referred to as "Mother of God" in the texts.
Uhh... because of people like you?
Uhhh...because of the confusion it creates.
To say "mother of God" implies God was created and that the mother was in existence prior to God.
You also have to say Mary is the mother of the Father and the Holy Spirit if she is the mother of God.
Are you prepared to say that?
Neither is “sola scriptura”.
Why is it so difficult to accept that the term “mother” as used in the title “Mother of God” is one who bore God in her womb not one who “created” God in her womb. That’s how it’s meant that’s how it’s used that’s what the title “Theotokos” means, it means “God-bearer” not “God-creator”.
Isn’t that enough of a distinction? Just as the Ark itself isn’t God by simply bearing His Word inside itself neither is Mary God or goddess just because she had the Word inside herself for 9 months.
Honestly what is the problem?
If A=B and B=C, do you deny that A=C?
To say "mother of God" implies God was created and that the mother was in existence prior to God.
You also have to say Mary is the mother of the Father and the Holy Spirit if she is the mother of God.
If we're in math class that formula is correct.
But this isn't math class.
Neither is a whole bunch of stuff the Roman Catholic leans on. You really don't want to go there.
But there is ample evidence for relying upon Scripture for the source of truth in regards to salvation and how we can obtain it.
It only implies that, with all due respect, to those who are ignorant of the title and how it's properly understood. I just gave you the proper understanding so at least you shouldn't have this problem anymore. Unless you only want to argue about it, instead of learning something true.
It does not imply that, any more than saying "President George Washington was the Father of Our Country" means the U.S. Presidency was in existence prior to the United States.
If there were any confusion on that score, one simple question would clear it up.
" You also have to say Mary is the mother of the Father and the Holy Spirit if she is the mother of God."
LOL. I "have" to say no such thing. It this were true, it would follow that by saying "Jesus is God," I would "have" to say Jesus "is" the Father and the Holy Spirit. No.
Jesus is one Person --- a Divine Person. One of the Blessed Trinity,
No one ever said Mary is the mother of the Blessed Trinity, Again, if there were any confusion on that score, one simple question would clear it up.
You can either acknowledge the definitions which everybody else has been able to grasp over the past 1600 years, or you can remain in perpetual attack mode against a doctrine whose terms you have refused to understand.
Or, a third possibility: you can take the Nestorian position that Jesus is not one, but two Persons, and that He was not eternal, infinite, all-powerful God for His entire existence, even when in the womb of Blessed Mary.
Which is it?
It's always that way with Roman Catholicism and Mary. Disclaimers have to be given to explain what the obvious meaning of the title means.
Which is it?
My position is founded upon Scripture.
14And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth. John 1:14 NASB
LOL. I "have" to say no such thing.
Well, yes you do if you're going to argue Mary is the Mother of God and that Jesus is God.
Simple as that.
What you decry as “qualifications” is called “the learning process”. I’m sorry if you, or anyone, is so resistant to learning a new fact (for example that the title “Theotokos” does not mean “God creator”) that learning anything new becomes a burdensome “qualification”.
Sheesh, what a pitiable state you describe. How you learned anything is beyond me, as any lesson requires “qualification” or clarification. It’s impossible to learn a new concept otherwise.
Well, hallelujah! So is mine!
And that is all that’s needed to explain Christ is both divine and human. No confusing non-Biblical title that Rome says you have to believe.
To bad you weren't there at Ephesus to demand of the entire Christian world of the 5th century---- now known as Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, Coptic, Ethiopian, Armenian, Syriac, Eritrean, etc.-- that they've gotta use your words, because it takes too much work for you to get the gist of theirs.
He can only continue to argue about it if others continue to argue with him about it. At some point, certain Catholics need to stop engaging certain posters on certain topics.
As it is this thread has been derailed once again by revisiting old Catholic vs Protestant debates with the same posters. Perhaps we could return to the original topic? I would think that this topic would bring more agreement than disagreement, no?
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.