Mary the mother of God?

Yes, that is often the case when only half of a complete sentence is considered.

 

Be very careful with such statements. It leans slighly towards the United Pentecostal Modalist heresy, though I in no way accusing you of that. You are correct that the Trinity are Three Persons yet One God. Each is not one third God making up One God. Each person by Himself is fully God. So it is correct to call each person by Himself as God. To say Mary is the Mother of God is correct or to say God died on the cross is correct since Jesus is God. No one however claims Mary is the Mother of the Trinity or that the Trinity died on the Cross but both statements refer to Jesus Christ as God Almighty.

Mary is the Mother of God in that the Second Person of the Trinity was incarnate in her womb. The Fathers used the statement Mother of God to defend His perfect Humanity and Perfect Deity. Scripture itself says Mary is the Mother of the Lord.

I think much of the problem deals with Catholic misuse of the term but it is time we reclaim the original usage.

 

I respectfully but completely disagree. Mary gave birth to his divinity as well, but that doesn't mean that's when his divinity began. It is not word games, just simple fact, imho. </font>[/QUOTE]If you will notice, I put the word birth in parentheses. This was my feeble effort to say that I understood that she gave birth to a child who was divine and human but that she did not generate the divine but did generate the physical. It is not saying that it was two people. It is just that the phrase "Mother of God" has the stroooonnng conotation of having generated some aspect of His divinity. She generated no aspect of it.

Let me try an analogy. Hewlet-Packard sells a computer, they manufactured the hardware but got the software from Microsoft. It is correct (acceptable and understood) to say that HP manufactured the computer which I bought. It is correct to say that HP manufactured the hardware. It is not correct to say that HP manufactured Windows XP. (It's just an analogy, please, be kind)

You are not being the least bit offensive. My intensity is directed totally at the concept itself. Any similarity between my statements and an ancient -ism is purely coincidental and unintentional.

 

I am not aware of any Catholic misuse of the term Mother of God. Could you provide some examples of this?

There are many misuses of other titles for Mary in Catholicism but I believe the Catholic use of Theotokos is orthodox and in line with the council of Ephesus.

 

I think if you try to divide the divinity of Christ from the humanity of Christ you negate the full value of the sacrifice of Christ.

That Christ was wholly man while wholly God is a very important theological issue.

The bible states that the angel told Joseph that the child Christ was conceived of the Holy Spirit. If a human parent is the Mother of any child concieved, then Mary is indeed the Mother of the child of the Holy Spirit. If Christ is wholly God, then Mary IS the Mother of God the Son.

 

"then Mary IS the Mother of God the Son."--------------------------------------------------------

That does not stand the test of reason. God the son is eternal and existed before Mary and in fact created Mary, so she can not be the Mother of God the Son. She is the mother of Jesus.

"That Christ was wholly man while wholly God is a very important theological issue."------------------------------------------------------------

And the fact that Mary is just a women and has no part of Christ's divinity is also an important theological issue.

 

Bunyon,

How do you separate Christ from Jesus?

As a 12 year old child He was preaching in the temple.

HE identifies Mary as His mother AT THE CROSS. Was He "not God" at the Cross?

 

1. Jesus is God the Son.
2. "mother of" does not require the meaning "origin of".

 

Ok, I see the question should have been: "'Did Mary "mother" Jesus?'"

Mary was a chosen vessel to bring forth the manchild Jesus, chosen among women, not greater in any sense but that she was predominately "clean"/ virgin, in her complete character. She mothered Jesus in the sense she provided all the necessary care a mother should give to a son, but as far as the physical mother? No, just as the first Adam had no mother, neither did Eve.

 

I agree with some of the other posters. Mary simply gave birth to the physical human part of Jesus. Just like my mother simply gave birth to my physical body. She had no part in my spirit or soul. Did your mothers have any role in the formation of your souls or spirits? I would never say my mother was the Mother of MY Soul or Spirit. Therefore, Mary was not the mother of the God Spirit who is God the Son. The son of God exisited before time.

 

Salamander -

How do you explain scripture which says the child was conceived of the Holy Spirit, and that she gave birth? Sounds like a physical mother to me.

 

Bunyon
"Why do I hear talk of the ; Chatholic church wanting to reunite all the time?"
"
Because the RCC want's to, it's among the Eastern-Orthodox that there is a large faction that is more hostile to the RCC than any IFB church on earth.

 

Salamander said:

Then you must answer the statement by Jesus when he told His "half-brothers", "Behold thy mother".

He didn't. He said that to the apostle John, and it was his way of saying "You take care of her now."

 

Bunyon said:

When discussing a title that the catholics use for Mary, you don't think other titles used by the catholic church would have a bearing on the title in question.

That's a sloppy way of reasoning. It's possible for the Roman church to be right about Mary in some ways (calling her the "Mother of God" or the "Blessed Virgin," understood properly, are wholly appropriate) and wrong in other ways (the "Immaculate Conception," her perpetual virginity).

What you seem to be saying is that if we agree with the Roman church on one thing, we have to agree with all the rest.

 

You are supporting precisely the non-Trinitarian Nestorian heresy that the council of ephesus was trying to refute.

 

Webdog said:

Mary the mother of Jesus is correct.

and

Mary is the mother of only the 100% man.

Artimaeus said:

Not one single atom of what Mary gave birth to was, is, or will be God. Mary gave birth to a physical vessel used by God.

and

Mary gave birth to Jesus, to His physical humanity but she did not give "birth" to ANY of His divinity.

Helen said:

That made her the physical mother of the physical child, Jesus. . . . However, when we speak of GOD, we are talking about spirit, and there is NO mother of God.

Bunyon said:

Mary simply gave birth to the physical human part of Jesus.

Wow. Nestorius lives, and he's right here on this forum.

Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it.

 

Bunyon said:

"Mary gave birth to his divinity as well,"

I think I know what you are trying to say, but at face value, this statement would qualify as heretical.

Was Jesus not fully God in the womb?

 

I think if you say Mary was NOT the mother of God you are calling Christ a liar OR you are denying the divinity of Christ. Either way I think you're on quick-sand in the theological sense.

Christ calls Mary "Mother".
The angel Gabriel tells Mary that the child she carries is conceived by God.
The angel tells Joseph that the child Mary carries is conceived by God.
Elizabeth recognizes that the child is the messiash while it is still in the womb.
The old prophet who begged not to die until he saw the messiah recognized Christ as the Messiah.
The Magi recognized Him.
The angels announced His birth.

I find nothing in scripture that indicates Mary was only "partly" the Mother of Christ or that Christ was only "partly" God.

 

Where? Every time He refers to Mary, He refers to her as "woman".

Mary was fully the mother of Jesus, who while 100% God, was also 100% human. Our finite minds cannot comprehend how Jesus was both God and man (separate---while the same). Jesus (the Man) was tempted. Could God be tempted? Jesus the Man died, and was resurrected. Could God EVER die? Under this premise, you would have mary being "fully" the mother of Christ, and under your theory, Jesus being "fully" God. This would have Mary being "fully" the mother of God, which is blasphemy.

 

Under this premise, you would have mary being "fully" the mother of Christ,

As opposed to being half his mother?

Motherhood is an all-or-nothing deal. You either are, or you aren't; no in-between.

and under your theory, Jesus being "fully" God.

Jesus is fully God. "For in him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily" (Col. 2:19).

This would have Mary being "fully" the mother of God, which is blasphemy.

Understood properly, it is in fact quite orthodox Christology. The blasphemy is in denying it. It's too bad they don't teach theology in church anymore.