Does God have a Mother?

[Bunyon]

"Bunion,
Have you actually read the primary source documents surrounding Ephesus or just secondary revisionist accounts? Perhaps if you read the former rather than the latter you'd be less quick to castigate folks like Cyril as "non-Christian". But I'm sure that wouldn't be in keeping with your conspiratorial anti-catholic (little 'c') agenda. "-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

I read several accounts I found on the internet and wycapedea. But they all agree, so I guess my point stands and makes sense which is why you want to dimess it. No one wants the title except you 2 or 3 die hards on this thread. But I guess having political appointees make decisions on these maters for the chruch makes sense to you. But unlike you, I can think for my self and I don't give Ephesus much credit based on my research, not on the anticatholic straw man you keep trying to throw out.

 

[Matt Black]

Originally posted by BobRyan:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Matt Black:
So, what happened - did a stork drop Baby Jesus on Bethlehem?

Is "That" the only alternative to the Trinity denying heresy "Mother of God"????

What special fallacy is THAT???

What about just "admitting" to the SAME THING that Bible writers do - that "Mary is the mother of Jesus"???

Why is that so "hard" for Catholics?

ANSWER: Because IF someone believes that she is also the MOTHER OF GOD - then that MUCH STRONGER statement WOULD be used frequently and often - JUST as our RC brethren do! Just as the Bible writers DO NOT DO!!

How can this "obvious point" be glossed over time after mind numbing time by the pro-RC posters here??

I just don't see why they are so bent on turning away from this obvious point.

In Christ,

Bob </font>[/QUOTE]Bob, how many more times? I am neither Catholic nor 'pro-RC'. I do admit the same thing as the Bible writers do - that Mary is the mother of Jesus. But I also accept what the Bible also says - that Jesus is God. Therefore, in so far as, by your own admission, Mary is the mother of Jesus, she is also mother of God. You can't have it both ways!

 

[Doubting Thomas]

Bunion:
I read several accounts I found on the internet and wycapedea. But they all agree, so I guess my point stands...

Which only means you've been selective in the secondary sources that you've chose to read. I've read the primary sources which reveals a different picture than the one to which you choose to cling.

But unlike you, I can think for my self

Hmmm...

...and I don't give Ephesus much credit based on my research, not on the anticatholic straw man you keep trying to throw out.

Perhaps then it is your "research" that is somewhat lacking.

 

[Gold Dragon]

For those interested in reading some primary sources.

CCEL : Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers : The Third Ecumenical Council: The Council of Ephesus (Philip Schaff)

 

[Eliyahu]

1. Do you have any literature convincing that either Calvin or Luther called Mary as Mother of God explicitly? I have not found any article supporting that. Calvin called the church is our mother(fourth book ch1-4, Institutes of Christian Religion)and the ch 13 of 2nd book is titled " Christ clothed with the true substance of human nature" so, he used the term of "clothed"
Then he mentioned " Virgin herself is called the mother of our Lord" (Lk 1:32) He never mentioned Mother of God anywhere,in my knowledge.
Then Calvin condemned both Nestorius and Servetus, and mentioned " Eternal Word before he was clothed with flesh was already the Son of God, Although He was God before he became man, he didn't therefore begin to be a new God"

Can you find anywhere Calvin stated Mother of God? I have no doubt that John Wesley refused the term Mother of God. Even Martin Luther would have explicitly or tacitly refused it.

2. Nestorius or any other ancient believers could have been wrong in some part of their beliefs as we find many mistakes even among the reformers, but it doesn't mean that they were wrong in refsusing the concept Mother of God.
The articles which we have today are the quotations quoted in the books written by his opponents and we can imagine those opponents would have exaggereated what the innocent true believers mentioned, as Inquisitors accused the innocent believers with human syllogism.

3. Therefore the Bible is the final judge until we stand up in front of the Lord at the Judgment Seat and we know that He will judge everyone and his or her behaviors, expressions, and what they believed, according to the Bible. We must remember that God considers any homage towards any other than God as a heinous criminal against God.
Especially we should note that the expression is found nowhere in the Bible but in the confessions by the goddess worshippers.

3. We must remember the true history of Church doesn't recognize "so-called Orthodox" as true Church of Christ. If you have ever read the Blood Trail of Baptist Church, or Pilgrim Church by Broadbent, you can find the so-called Orthodox persecuted the true churches like Waldenese, Albigene, Bruder Gemeinde, and so on and I believe they have refused the expression " Mother of God " all the time. God preserved such faithful believers throughout the ages and will continue to do so until He comes again.

 

[Doubting Thomas]

Originally posted by Eliyahu:


The articles which we have today are the quotations quoted in the books written by his opponents and we can imagine those opponents would have exaggereated what the innocent true believers mentioned, as Inquisitors accused the innocent believers with human syllogism.

We do have his letters to Cyril. (Unless you are going to claim those were distorted as well)

We must remember the true history of Church doesn't recognize "so-called Orthodox" as true Church of Christ. If you have ever read the Blood Trail of Baptist Church...

(That says it all right there. )

 

[Matt Black]

Right, so the Cathars were True Christians(TM).

Consolamentum, anyone? No? Didn't think so.

What DT said.

 

[Eliyahu]

I would not judge anyone without giving the person the full chance to advocate himself. Nestorius could have been wrong in some part of his understanding as Reformers did, but he was right in refusing the expression " Mother of God"

Because any part of Nestorius' arguments was wrong, and therefore all of what Nestorius argued were wrong? In that same logic, the expression of Mary as Mother of God declared by such heretic Roman Catholic is wrong! because Roman Catholic performed or claimed idol worship, Maria worship, purgatory, papacy,indulgence, cleibacy, infant baptism, etc.

Can't I say so in the same logic?

How is the comparison between those condemned by RC and RCC itself? RCC itself has been persecuting and killing the people of God throughout the history and is still the biggest cult today full of heresies! Those condemned and persecuted didn't kill as many as RCC. If you deny it, please read Blood Trail of Baptists and Matyrs by John Foxe and Pilgrim Church by EH Broadbent

This is why I believe you should not connect this matter with Nestorius or Decetism which I do not know, but just stay on the Bible. This is how we can say Past is Passed and discern today only based on the Bible.

 

[Doubting Thomas]

If you deny it, please read Blood Trail of Baptists

No thanks. (Been there; done that. ) I'll stick with the primary sources and not pseudo-historical narratives.

 

[Eliyahu]

Originally posted by Doubting Thomas:
Wrong. You simply refuse to acknowledge the sense in which "mother of God" has always been used. In fact, to deny that the Mary is the Mother of God is to deny that the one she bore (in time) from conception was true God (from eternity). That, my friend, is the heresy of "Nestorianism"--the attempt to divide Christ into two personal subjects.

Mary is indeed the Mother of God because the one she conceived , bore and gave birth to is in fact truly God. However, she obviously is not the source of Christ's divinity, since He had that from eternity. (If you perist in equating "mother of God" with "source of divinity", you are merely erecting a straw man.)

It's really quite simple:
Mary is the mother of (conceived, carried, gave birth to) Jesus.

Jesus is God

Therefore, Mary is the mother of (conceived, carried, gave birth to) God [/QB]

[/B]


As you said, "that is the heresy of Nestorius",
In the same logic and way, I would say that such human syllogism is the Heresy of Goddess Worshippers, Worshipping Mother of Harlot"

Human Syllogism doesn't work all the time as we can see in Trinity.

God was in Jesus, Jesus was in God, Holy Spirit was in Jesus, therefore did God the Father die at the Cross?

We must remember that Divinity of Jesus existed before the Conception in Mary and Mary was not the mother for that Divinity.

Already we noticed the silly syllogism about the Word. Word was God, Word became flesh, therefore is flesh God? You must note that there is no Article before flesh (σαρξ), which is further explained in 1 Tim 3:16 (enfleshed)
We have to limit the syllogism only within the limit allowed and used by Bible.
What did Mary do when the Divinity of Jesus worked? He noticed the body prepared by God and obeyed Him as in Heb 10:5-7.

I am very sure that we have to limit the application of Human Syllogism to that used in the Bible.

Otherwise, you are condemning even the Apostles as heretic because they never called Mary Mother of God, sometimes called just woman, and Heb 7:3 says Melchizedec has no mother as Son of God has no Mother, and therefore both are similar each other.

Interpreting Bible by Human Syllogism can easily find the contradiction with Trinity, and moreover our current issue "Mother of God" is apparently connected with Trinity because she is not the Mother of Holy Spirit at all.

 

[Ransom]

Bunyon said:

Examine what happened at ephesus with your own eyes, ears and heart.

When the evidence fails you, trust your emotions.

 

[Ransom]

BobRyan said:

What about just "admitting" to the SAME THING that Bible writers do - that "Mary is the mother of Jesus"???

Was Jesus God Incarnate, or wasn't he?

Man . . . getting some Christians to admit to being orthodox is like pulling hens' teeth.

 

[Ransom]

Eliyahu said:

If you have ever read the Blood Trail of Baptist Church, or Pilgrim Church by Broadbent, you can find the so-called Orthodox persecuted the true churches like Waldenese, Albigene, Bruder Gemeinde, and so on

Eliyahu is not a Baptist by his own admission. This means that he is not a member of the true Church of Christ, according to the theology of Trail of Blood author J. M. Carroll and other like-minded Baptist Successionists.

It's symptomatic of the mushy-headed thinking that runs rampant in this thread that he thinks such works support his theories when they would condemn him as an outsider to the Church!

 

[Ransom]

Doubting Thomas said:

Mary is the mother of (conceived, carried, gave birth to) Jesus.

Jesus is God

Therefore, Mary is the mother of (conceived, carried, gave birth to) God

Eliyahu replied:

As you said, "that is the heresy of Nestorius",

No, that is the exact opposite of the heresy of Nestorius.

It's not enough for you to sling big words around. If you want to sound like you know what you are talking about, you have to know what the big words actually mean.

 

[Doubting Thomas]

Originally posted by Eliyahu:
As you said, "that is the heresy of Nestorius",
In the same logic and way, I would say that such human syllogism is the Heresy of Goddess Worshippers, Worshipping Mother of Harlot"

When arguments fail, ad hominem attacks and straw man fallacies to the rescue!

Human Syllogism doesn't work all the time as we can see in Trinity.

Interestingly enough the word "Trinity" is never found in Scripture. Neither Jesus nor the apostles called God "Trinity" in Scriptures. I guess we should throw that one out as well...

God was in Jesus, Jesus was in God, Holy Spirit was in Jesus, therefore did God the Father die at the Cross?

No, that's the error of Patripassianism. The Father was not incarnate. (I made this same point several pages back...someone's not paying attention. )

We must remember that Divinity of Jesus existed before the Conception in Mary and Mary was not the mother for that Divinity.

I think that has been said all along. However, the One Person Mary was the mother of was indeed divine, from conception--and indeed long before that.

Already we noticed the silly syllogism about the Word. Word was God, Word became flesh, therefore is flesh God?

No, the flesh is not "God" (that would be along the lines of Eutychianism), but it is God's. The former was rejected at Chalcedon, but I suppose you don't accept that council either...

We have to limit the syllogism only within the limit allowed and used by Bible.

I'm sure the Arian heretics would agree with you when as they denied that God the Word was consubstantial with God the father since the term "consubstantial" couldn't be found in the Holy Writ. (Neither could the Trinitarian formula one essence in three persons for that matter.)

I am very sure that we have to limit the application of Human Syllogism to that used in the Bible.

To bad for the folks who framed the Nicene Creed.

 

[BobRyan]

Originally posted by Matt Black:
[Bob, how many more times? I am neither Catholic nor 'pro-RC'.

Hmm - I seem to recall a time when you posted something about crossing over.

Matt Black
I do admit the same thing as the Bible writers do - that Mary is the mother of Jesus.

Well then you are in the same company as all Bible writers and every Christian group that ever existed on the face of the earth!

But I also accept what the Bible also says - that Jesus is God.

Well then you are in the same company as the Bible writers and all trinitarian Christians.

So far so good.

Notice that this is where the inspired authors of the NT text - the saints that founded the Christian church were CAREFUL not take these foundational truths and ADD to them the PROCREATIONAL heresy that "Mary is the Mother of God".

Perhaps you think they were in error? Or maybe you think that such a gross statement "Was not worth mentioning because God had so many mothers back then".

Matt Black
Therefore, in so far as, by your own admission, Mary is the mother of Jesus, she is also mother of God.

How many Catholics do you know of that would NOT go around calling Mary the Mother of God every chance they got? How many do you know that would ONLY call her "the Mother of Jesus" while thinking the whole time that she is in fact the "Mother of God"?

Answer: NONE!!

Yet this is what you expect us to believe ALL THE BIBLE WRITERS DID!!???

So NOT ONE would actually OMIT this critical point in REAL life -- but ALL Bible writers forgot to mention it???!!!!

Come on - give us something "believable" - an "easter bunny" tale would be more believable then the idea that the introduction of the MOTHER of God into history was not worth mentioning!

In Christ,

Bob

 

[riverm]

Originally posted by Matt Black:
Bob, how many more times? I am neither Catholic nor 'pro-RC'.

Originally posted by BobRyan:
Hmm - I seem to recall a time when you posted something about crossing over.

Careful now…there’s a witch hunt going on…

 

[Eliyahu]

Originall

• • Originally posted by Ransom:

    y posted by Ransom:
    Eliyahu said:
    
    If you have ever read the Blood Trail of Baptist Church, or Pilgrim Church by Broadbent, you can find the so-called Orthodox persecuted the true churches like Waldenese, Albigene, Bruder Gemeinde, and so on
    
    Eliyahu is not a Baptist by his own admission. This means that he is not a member of the true Church of Christ, according to the theology of Trail of Blood author J. M. Carroll and other like-minded Baptist Successionists.
    Trail of Blood author J. M. Carroll and other like-minded Baptist Successionists
    It's symptomatic of the mushy-headed thinking that runs rampant in this thread that he thinks such works support his theories when they would condemn him as an outsider to the Church!

    Ransom, you don't understand the history of the church.
    
    BTW, one thing that should be kept in mind is that Human Syllogism doesn't work in Bible interpretation as we can see in Trinity issue.
    
    Therefore such a logic that Jesus is God, Mary is the mother of Jesus and therefore Mary is Mother of God, doesn't stand because it contradicts Trinity, the word contradicts the Pre-existence of Jesus, it gives wrong impression on Mary as if she pre-existed and cause goddess worship, and it is not used in the Bible.
    
    Such theory will mislead the people to goddess worship heading toward Lake of Fire

 

[Bunyon]

"Which only means you've been selective in the secondary sources that you've chose to read. I've read the primary sources which reveals a different picture than the one to which you choose to cling."----------------------------------------------------------------------------

You mean the account written by Cyrill and his minions. You would expect a tyrant to be honest about his tyranny. The blind leading the blind it seems.

 

[Bunyon]

"We do have his letters to Cyril. (Unless you are going to claim those were distorted as well)"--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I have read those! And he should not have been excommunicated them. If you go up to the average lay person and try to get them to sing you syllogism you will get similar answers. But you would label them Heretic. If I believed in reincarnation, I would think you were a reincarnation of Cyrill or, perhaps, Torquemada!