Does God have a Mother?

[Johnv]

Originally posted by Eliyahu:
Was Mary the Mother of God, before Jesus was conceived ?...
nobody answered whether Jesus was 100% human and 100% divine before the conception.

No. He wasn't 100% human until he was in her womb (presumably, when he was concieved).

For the record, I answered that question verbatim several pages ago. You either missed it, or chose to ignore it. I'm at a loss as to why you would do either, since the question appears to be of such a priority to you.

It's a shame, however, that you will expect answers to your questions (and miss them), but you will refuse to answer other peoples' questions.

 

[Eliyahu]

JOHNV said:
Hebrews 7:3 doesn't refer to Jesus.

You are denying Jesus is Son of God! which is heretic!

Whoever confess that Jesus is the Son of God, God abides in him and he in God.(1 JOhn 4:15)
Who is a liar but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ? (1John 2:22)

 

[Eliyahu]

JOHNV said :
Jesus wasn't human 100% until the conception.
After that, he became 100% human and 100% divine.

then you are separating the nature of Jesus into two, right?

 

[natters]

Originally posted by Eliyahu:
JOHNV said :
Jesus wasn't human 100% until the conception.
After that, he became 100% human and 100% divine.

then you are separating the nature of Jesus into two, right?

NO. The Word BECAME flesh. Why is this so hard to accept?

 

[Johnv]

Originally posted by Eliyahu:
You are denying Jesus is Son of God! which is heretic!

I am not. I am saying very clearly and plainly that Hebrews 7:3 does not refer to Jesus. How one makes the jump from scriptural context to an accusation of denying Jesus' divinity is perplexing, not to mention pharasaical on the part of the accuser. If you need some clarity on pointing fingers, look in the mirror.

hen you are separating the nature of Jesus into two, right?

No, I'm comprehending the difference between his human nature and divine nature. I am not separating them.

 

[Eliyahu]

Natters said:
I thought my comments were clear. No, Jesus was not 100% human before the conception.

You may believe that Jesus existed before the conception, as Son of God.

Then, Natters is seprating the nature of Jesus into 2, as Nestorius did.

 

[natters]

No. The Word BECAME flesh. The Word didn't "fill" or "join" or "combine with" or "put on" flesh.

 

[Johnv]

(Of course, Eliyahu does not see his own hypocrisy of Nestorian behavior, since he has no problem separating Jesus' natures when it comes to Mary being his mother.)

 

[Eliyahu]

JohnV said:
I am saying very clearly and plainly that Hebrews 7:3 does not refer to Jesus.

Hebrews 7:3 refers to "Son of God"

Please read once again! "without mother... like Son of God" Son of God is mentioned there, and you say, it doesn't refer to Jesus. Therefore you are saing Jesus is the person different from Son of God.

You say, Jesus was not 100% human, after the conception he became 100% human, how can you say so without dividing humanity and divinity?

 

[Johnv]

Originally posted by Eliyahu:
Hebrews 7:3 refers to "Son of God"

It does not. It refers to one who is "like" the Son of God: "like the Son of God he (Melchizedek) remains a priest forever."

You say, Jesus was not 100% human, after the conception he became 100% divine, how can you say so without dividing humanity and divinity?

What do you mean, "how can you say so without dividing humanity and divinity?". I said it plainly without dividing his humanity and divinity.

 

[Eliyahu]

I agree that Word became Flesh, not the sperm.
Jesus existed before he was coneived in her. You say that 100% humanity cannot be separated from 100% divinity, and there was no 100% humanity in Him. Then is it not contradictory?
Please explain how can the difference happen between 2 times, without separating the nature of Jesus, before the conception and after the conception.

Before Conception, Jesus 100% divine, no humanity.

After Conception, Jesus 100% divine, 100% human.

Is this your belief about the nature of Jesus while you believe that 2 natures cannot be separated ?

 

[natters]

Originally posted by Eliyahu:
You say that 100% humanity cannot be separated from 100% divinity, and there was no 100% humanity in Him. Then is it not contradictory?

Because he became flesh. What does "became" mean?

Before Conception, Jesus 100% divine, no humanity.

After Conception, Jesus 100% divine, 100% human.

Is this your belief about the nature of Jesus while you believe that 2 natures cannot be separated ?

Yes, that is my belief. The Word became flesh. Became. Simple.

 

[DHK]

Heb.7:3 refers to a Christophany or which there are a few in the Old Testament. We also find the Lord communing with Abraham before the two angels went and destroyed Sodom, for example.

John 4:24 clearly says:

John 4:24 God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.

A Spirit has no flesh. Christ was referring to God, the triune Godhead. He wasn't redefining God. A Spirit has no flesh.

The Word became flesh and dwelt among us. However, the Word was God, and the Word was in the beginning. He also created all things. He became flesh. God, being Spirit, took upon himself flesh. He was not "in flesh" before this time, except in occasional temporary periods of time when he chose to appear in flesh (in theophanies) to certain individuals in Old Testament times. Tbese are exceptiona, not the norm.

God is a Spirit; they that worship him must worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.
Now, Jesus having lived, died, buried, and arisen from the dead; sits at the right hand of the throne of God. He retains his resurrected body. We shall be like him in this respect when the resurrection takes place. Before he came into this world as an infant he never had a body. God is spirit.
DHK

 

[Eliyahu]

JohnV said:

It(Heb 7:3) refers to one who is "like" the Son of God: "like the Son of God he (Melchizedek) remains a priest forever."

Is the Son of God not Jesus ? Do you deny that?

Let's have the readers judge whether there is no contradiction in your statements, because :

1) What you say about the 2 natures of Jesus is in unity and inseparable may be right for the time after he was conceived.

2) But if you say that there was no 100% humanity of Jesus before the incarnation, then you are saying He had only divinity at that time before the incarnation. Isn't this the separation of the 2 natures? Is it too difficult to understand the logic?

 

[Johnv]

Originally posted by Eliyahu:
You say that 100% humanity cannot be separated from 100% divinity, and there was no 100% humanity in Him. Then is it not contradictory?

No. It's not contradictory. Others here appear to comprehend it just fine. Understand it fully? Perhaps we can't do that until we die.

Please explain how can the difference happen between 2 times, without separating the nature of Jesus, before the conception and after the conception.

I think I've explained it adequately already. I'd just be repeating myself.

Before Conception, Jesus 100% divine, no humanity.
After Conception, Jesus 100% divine, 100% human.
Is this your belief about the nature of Jesus while you believe that 2 natures cannot be separated ?

Yes. That's what scripture appears to imply.

 

[Johnv]

Originally posted by Eliyahu:
Is the Son of God not Jesus ? Do you deny that?

That's not the issue. The verse in Hebrews isn't talking about the Son of God. It's talking about somone who is like the Son of God in one aspect.

It's clear that you lack comprehension of understanding scripture (the aforementioned Hebrews). So it comes as no surprise that you lack comprehension of how it is permissible to refer to Mary as the Mother of God the Son.

 

[Eliyahu]

Natters, you see the difference between 2 times:

Before incarnation, He was not 100% human (even though he was human from time to time in a theophanic appearance)but just 100% divine

After incarnation, He was 100% human and 100% divine.

Then are you not separating the natures ?

Mary was not mother for the divinity before the incarnation. She was not Mother for the divinity after the incarnation either. But she is the mother for the humanity, right?
If you disagree, do you say that she is the mother of the divinity too?

 

[natters]

Originally posted by Eliyahu:
Natters, you see the difference between 2 times:

Before incarnation, He was not 100% human (even though he was human from time to time in a theophanic appearance)but just 100% divine

After incarnation, He was 100% human and 100% divine.

Then are you not separating the natures ?

Because the Word became flesh. What does became mean to you?

Mary was not mother for the divinity before the incarnation. She was not Mother for the divinity after the incarnation either. But she is the mother for the humanity, right?
If you disagree, do you say that she is the mother of the divinity too?

Because his humanity was divine. The Word became flesh. The flesh was divine, and she was the mother of the flesh, thus she was mother of the divine.

Look at it this way: how could she NOT be mother of the divine, if the flesh was divine?

 

[Eliyahu]

I think we covered enough, and better to leave to the readers to discern and judge.

The key points are that

1)Trinity means Unity in one and Mary cannot be the Mother of God because she is not the mother of Holy Spirit or Father.

2)If humanity and divinity cannot be separated, before the birth of Jesus, before his incarnation, before the conception, He was only divine, not 100% human, but after the conception, he became 100% human and 100% divine in unity.
This is contradictory in my view, which is left to the readers.

3) Important thing is that Mary is just a creature while Jesus is the Creator.

 

[natters]

Originally posted by Eliyahu:
I think we covered enough, and better to leave to the readers to discern and judge.

The key points are that

1)Trinity means Unity in one and Mary cannot be the Mother of God because she is not the mother of Holy Spirit or Father.

Was the Father begotten? Was the Holy Spirit crucified, buried, and resurrected?

2)If humanity and divinity cannot be separated, before the birth of Jesus, before his incarnation, before the conception, He was only divine, not 100% human, but after the conception, he became 100% human and 100% divine in unity.
This is contradictory in my view, which is left to the readers.

What does "became" mean to you?

3) Important thing is that Mary is just a creature while Jesus is the Creator.

I don't think anyone disagrees with that.