Mary, mother of God

[TP]

Greetings,

Someone, in another post referred to Mary, Mother of God, as a Catholic error.

The Title Mother of God was given for Christological reasons to fight the heresy of Nestorianism. Do people on this board disagree with this title? If so, do you believe in Nestorianism? The protestant reformers didn't even have a problems with this title.

peace

 

[Johnv]

Originally posted by TP:
Someone, in another post referred to Mary, Mother of God, as a Catholic error.

Those who carry the least bit of Romophobia will typically refer to her as the "mother of Jesus", yet will elsewhere use "Jesus" and "God" interchangeably. It's a no-win situation. As a Baptist, you can't say "mother of God" without someone accusing you of being a "romanst sympathizer". There is technically nothing wrong with the phrase "mother of God", so long as the inference is on God the Son. Mary is not the mother of God the Father or God the Holy Spirit. Since Catholics don't think of Mary as the mother of God the Father or God the Holy Spirit, it's a nonissue.

 

[TP]

Greetings,

So what you are saying is that it is a theologically correct title, but for pastoral reasons it is not well accepted in baptist circles. Theologically=ok, Pastorally=not the best.

That is a good arguement and explanation.

peace

 

[Johnv]

I wouldn't say "theologically correct" (since that might imply that anything else is incorrect), I would say "theologically permissible".

Hope that helps

 

[Bro. Curtis]

It is far from a non-issue. Holy Mary-Mother of God is a travesty. Mary wasn't holy, as the bible attests to, and she merely gave birth to Christ's humanity. The catholic doctrine calls her the mother of Jesus, AND the mother of God. Either God always was, or he had a mother. Since scripture tells us he always was, and the RCC says he had a mother, which one do you reject ?

God had no mother, Mary wasn't holy, and it isn't theologically correct to refer to her as God's mother.

 

[steaver]

I don't think "mother of God" is anything to get riled up about as long as it is defined in context. But that isn't the problem with the catholic doctrine concerning Mary. Praying to her is idolatry. It is a terrible teaching of the RCC and it wolfishly leads millions into this horrific sin! They are held captive by their own traditions. You would think at some point someone with some influence in this church would get enlightend and push to abandon the practice and follow the scriptures! But what generally happens is when one chooses the scriptures over tradition they simply leave the RCC.

God Bless!

 

[TP]

Greetings,

You said: she merely gave birth to Christ's humanity.

Response: People do not give birth to a nature, they give birth to a PERSON. Humanity is Christ's Nature: He had Human Nature and Divine Nature. However, a mother does NOT give birth to nature, but to a Person. Have you ever seen anyone give birth to a nature without giving birth to a person?

Jesus was a DIVINE person. His personhood was the second divine person of the Trinity. Jesus was a Divine person with two natures, human and divine. Jesus was NOT a Human PERSON, he was a divine PERSON. The Person Mary gave birth to was divine and ONly divine. The Person that Mary gave birth to was Second person of Trinity: God.

No travesty here, just fact. If you say Jesus was a Human person, then that is the Nestorian Heresy.

peace

 

[I Am Blessed 24]

The Person that Mary gave birth to was Second person of Trinity: God.

The SECOND person of the Trinity is Jesus, the Son of God. The FIRST person of the Trinity is God. The THIRD person of the Trinity is the Holy Spirit.

Jesus came to earth as a PERSON - a human being - a man. He suffered the same temptations and trials that we all do...

The only thing 'special' that sets Mary apart was that she was chosen by God to give birth to Jesus. She was a sinner just like the rest of us. To give her a higher 'place' is heresy.

 

[dianetavegia]

Mary was impregnated by the Holy Spirit, one of the God head.

 

[rsr]

TP said:

"The Person that Mary gave birth to was Second person of Trinity: God."

I'm a little confused here, which happens pretty often. I thought Mary was the mother of Jesus, who was the hypostatic union of the divine and human natures, not of God the Son, who existed before the Incarnation.

 

[Bro. James]

The nature of:

Jesus--theos/anthropos--God in human form. Jesus is Immanuel--God with us.
Jesus is I AM THAT I AM-- God of the OT--Jehovah.
Jesus is the Word--incarnate--the Creator God.
Jesus is the second man Adam--born of woman--without the sin nature--He could not sin.
Jesus in the sinless sacrifice--He is unique.

Mary, the mother of Jesus, was born of a man--she had the same sin nature as anyone in Adam's race.

Mary conceived of the Holy Spirit--her first-born son was Jesus. He was Divine before conception. How, exactly, this happened cannot be demonstrated in the laboratory, nor does it need to be--the Virgin Birth to be a fact.

Mary had other children--by Joseph. She cannot be co-redemptorix with Jesus--she is a sinner--Jesus is without sin.

Scripture available on request.

Selah,

Bro. James

 

[Bro. Curtis]

Originally posted by TP:
Greetings,

You said: she merely gave birth to Christ's humanity.

Response: People do not give birth to a nature, they give birth to a PERSON. Humanity is Christ's Nature: He had Human Nature and Divine Nature. However, a mother does NOT give birth to nature, but to a Person. Have you ever seen anyone give birth to a nature without giving birth to a person?

Jesus was a DIVINE person. His personhood was the second divine person of the Trinity. Jesus was a Divine person with two natures, human and divine. Jesus was NOT a Human PERSON, he was a divine PERSON. The Person Mary gave birth to was divine and ONly divine. The Person that Mary gave birth to was Second person of Trinity: God.

No travesty here, just fact. If you say Jesus was a Human person, then that is the Nestorian Heresy.

peace

Jesus was fully man, and fully God. And I'm Scots-Irish-French Canadian, & Indian. Would't know a Nestorian if I ran over one.

And as far as I know, the bible NEVER puts a numerical order on the trinity. I could be wrong.

 

[Bro. Curtis]

Originally posted by rsr:
TP said:

"The Person that Mary gave birth to was Second person of Trinity: God."

I'm a little confused here, which happens pretty often. I thought Mary was the mother of Jesus, who was the hypostatic union of the divine and human natures, not of God the Son, who existed before the Incarnation.

Agreed. There are several references to Jesus, the person, in the O/T, aren't there ?

 

[John3v36]

Originally posted by Bro. Curtis:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by rsr:
TP said:

"The Person that Mary gave birth to was Second person of Trinity: God."

I'm a little confused here, which happens pretty often. I thought Mary was the mother of Jesus, who was the hypostatic union of the divine and human natures, not of God the Son, who existed before the Incarnation.

Agreed. There are several references to Jesus, the person, in the O/T, aren't there ? </font>[/QUOTE]Its hard to be the mother of someone who predates you!!!

 

[TP]

Greetings,

Traditional orthodox theology(protestant, catholic, etc.) seems to be pretty weak on this board. I thought Trinitarian theology was something we would agree with.

There are 3 persons of the Trinity: Father, Son, Holy Spirit. The Son became incarnate. Mary was the Mother of the son in that he was born through her. This does NOT mean that she pre-dated him, or created him, as MOTHER, it means she gave birth to him.

You said: I thought Mary was the mother of Jesus, who was the hypostatic union of the divine and human natures, not of God the Son, who existed before the Incarnation.

Response: As your statement says: Divine Nature and Human Nature. BUT a mother does not give birth to a nature, they give birth to a PERSON. There is only ONE person: The SON!!! (classically called the second person of the divine trinity). What do you think the Natures were Hypostatically UNITED TO!! The Person, the ONLY Person that passed through Mary's womb was the SON, the DIVINE SON. There was NOT a human Person involved at ALL. If you don't trust me go to ANY protestant/or Catholic theology text book. This is first year theology stuff here. Mary gave birth to a divine Person. Mary did NOT give birth to a Human person. So divine means GOD, so mary was the mother of God. Mother of God(NOT creator of God, not pre-existant to God, nothing like that: Mother of God).

 

[TP]

Greetings,

Everyone is so insistant that Mary is just another sinner. What makes us NOT a sinner? To have God dwelling in us, and this saves us: Well, Mary had God dwelling in her in ways we could not even imagine. Through her embilical cord he passed fluids to the Son of God. She was not only Spiritually connected with God(Let it be done to me according to your word), but she was actually physically connected to God. She was saved by sin in advance to prepare her for this ultimate grace of carrying God within her.

peace

 

[Bro. Curtis]

She left a 12 year old kid at a party, and had no idea he was even missing for a whole day, if you believe scripture. She had to look for him for three days before finding him. No matter if Jesus ran away, or not, she assumed he was with her, when he wasn't.

Isn't child neglect a sin ?

If she was sinless, why did she address Christ, on the cross, as her savior ?

 

[dianetavegia]

Originally posted by TP:
Everyone is so insistant (sic) that Mary is just another sinner. What makes us NOT a sinner? To have God dwelling in us, and this saves us: Well, Mary had God dwelling in her in ways we could not even imagine. Through her embilical (sic) cord he passed fluids to the Son of God. She was not only Spiritually connected with God(Let it be done to me according to your word), but she was actually physically connected to God. She was saved by sin in advance to prepare her for this ultimate grace of carrying God within her.

The umbilical is a cord like structure about 22 in. long in the pregnant human female, extending from the abdominal wall of the fetus to the placenta afterbirth, organ that develops in the uterus during pregnancy. Fluids entering this cord do NOT back flow into the mother. Waste material the baby puts off is sent back through the cord and enters the mothers blood.

She was not only Spiritually connected with God(Let it be done to me according to your word), but she was actually physically connected to God. She was saved by sin in advance to prepare her for this ultimate grace of carrying God within her.

Then why did Mary find favor with God if she was pre- saved?

I'm sorry. I cannot understand a Catholic priest wanting to waste time here when he could be minstering to those of like faith.

 

[TP]

Greetings,

You said: She left a 12 year old kid at a party, and had no idea he was even missing for a whole day, if you believe scripture.

Response: First of all 12 was almost an adult in their culture. They had more freedom. Second of all sin includes the intention to do evil. If Mary thought he was with relatives, that is no evil intention. Where is the sin? There is a big difference between SIN and Mistake. I am sure Jesus made many mistakes, but he never sinned. Spilling milk is not a sin, however pouring milk over your sister's head is a sin. See the difference.

peace

 

[Bro. Curtis]

No such thing as a sin of omission ?

Also, can you point to me, in scripture, where Mary is addressed as the mother of God ?