to Theotokos or not to Theotokos....

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Jul 17, 2009
353
0
0
#1
Here's a pretty neato half hour audio lecture on the Theotokos and though many protestants reject the Theotokos I thought I might share. It goes through the bible and explains a little as to why we consider the blessed Mary, ever-virgin etc. If you click (and I did it right) an audio file will start playing or you will be asked if you want to save the audio file to your computer.

CLICK ME!


Also, here's a little on Nestorianism. Notice the year here and keep in mind the year that the canonization of scripture took place. The rejection of the term Theotokos relates to the splitting of his two natures.

Nestorius (c. 386–c. 451) was a pupil of Theodore of Mopsuestia in Antioch in Syria (modern Turkey) and later became Archbishop of Constantinople. He taught that the human and divine aspects of Christ were distinct natures, not unified. He preached against the use of the title Mother of God (Theotokos) for the Virgin Mary and would only call her Mother of Christ (Christotokos). He also argued that God could not suffer on the cross, as he is omnipotent. Therefore, the human part of Christ died on the cross, but not the divine.
His opponents accused him of dividing Christ into two persons: they claimed that proposing that God the Word did not suffer and die on the cross, while Jesus the man did, or that God the Word was omniscient, while Jesus the man had limited knowledge, implied two separate persons with separate experiences.
Nestorius responded that he believed that Christ was indeed one person (Greek: prosopon), though not one hypostasis. Opposed by Cyril of Alexandria, Nestorius was condemned at the First Council of Ephesus in 431.
The Council held that Christ is one hypostasis, and that the Virgin Mary is the mother of God. The condemning pronouncement of the Council resulted in the Nestorian schism and the separation of the Assyrian Church of the East from the Byzantine Church.[1] However, even Ephesus could not settle the issue, and the Byzantine Church was soon split again over the question of whether Christ had one or two natures, leading to the Chalcedonian schism.


-- wiki






Of course if you want to get a much better understanding of the heresy of Nestorianism, there are probably a lot of online resources but they might not be protestant... (just warning you)






For more in depth audio study on the blessed Theotokos CLICK CLICK - 9 more audio studies on the subject











God bless
 
J

jgrig2

Guest
#2
I would reccomend Reading Turretin and Owen on historic Protestant Christology and less wikipedia. Calling mary the mother of God is simply misleading. Yes there is a sense in which we want to affirm that but at the end of the day scripture teaches all man kind fell in Adam (including Mary- romans 5) which is why a second Adam was needed. Jesus died for Mary. Many of the beliefs Catholics have about Mary (assended into Heaven, sinless, being tested for fornication at the temple, her immaculate conception- which was not immaculate... a married couple had sex! thats it. born of the seed of man) can only be based on late tradition and medevival superstition. Heck even the Catholic Church officially did not teach as dogma the infallibility of the pope till the 19th century officially.
 
J

jgrig2

Guest
#3
A quick note. We must never separate Christ into 2 persons but we must ALWAYS disctinguish Christ's 2 natures. Just because MAYBE there were some fathers who used the term that does not mean it was a universally accepted dogma. Theology is always in the process of becoming more and more clear (Lord WIlling) and precise. The Jews did not understand the trinitarian concept yet are we to call Moses a Heretic? The exact christological nature and other issues needed time and reflection and going back to the Word of God to come up with the best response. Making disctinctions between the two natures without dividing the person is indeed a great mystery but its a philosoophical one that is necessary to preserve the unity of the Godhead.
 
Jul 17, 2009
353
0
0
#4
I would reccomend Reading Turretin and Owen on historic Protestant Christology and less wikipedia.

Just posting it (wiki) for the general masses to consume... Anyone serious will probably look beyond wikipedia for more info.


Calling mary the mother of God is simply misleading.
I thought so to but I see why it's most probably the other way around. It's misleading not to call Mary the Mother of God.


Yes there is a sense in which we want to affirm that but at the end of the day scripture teaches all man kind fell in Adam (including Mary- romans 5) which is why a second Adam was needed.Jesus died for Mary.
You'll find no disagreement there (though we probably have a differing views on Original Sin).

Many of the beliefs Catholics have about Mary (assended into Heaven, sinless, being tested for fornication at the temple, her immaculate conception- which was not immaculate...
... that would be Roman Catholics.

a married couple had sex!
I'll disagree on that one.

Heck even the Catholic Church officially did not teach as dogma the infallibility of the pope till the 19th century officially.
Yeah, this is an Eastern Orthodox study on the Theotokos. The Roman Catholics don't have a monopoly on her. Thought I'd offer up the Orthodox position.


Thank you :)
 
S

suaso

Guest
#5
If Mary isn't the mother of God, then Jesus was not God. That's what Theotokos means: God-bearer. She gave birth to God: she gave birth to Jesus, and Jesus was God.

Some argue that she gave birth only to his human nature. That would be like saying my own mother gave birth to my flesh but not my soul. His was the flesh and soul of a divine man: Jesus Christ the Lord who is God; of one being with the Father. His flesh and soul were as much one as our own selves are one completeness. Jesus was man and God completely, and this one complete Jesus was born of Mary. She bore God. The reason the Orthodox and the Catholics teach this theology of the Theotokos is to affirm the belief that Jesus Christ was God.

As for the other things mentioned in this thread that have little to to with the subject of Theotokos: We (Catholics) believed the pope was infallible before the 19th century. We didn't have to define it as truth until people started to think otherwise. It was never defined before hand simply because it typically wasn't questioned. Same thing with Theotokos. No one had to ascribe the title of God-Bearer to Mary until people began to doubt that Jesus was truly God and truly man at the same time and in the same person. You don't see stop signs at busy intersections until someone causes a fatality either.
 
Jul 17, 2009
353
0
0
#6
If Mary isn't the mother of God, then Jesus was not God. That's what Theotokos means: God-bearer. She gave birth to God: she gave birth to Jesus, and Jesus was God.

Some argue that she gave birth only to his human nature. That would be like saying my own mother gave birth to my flesh but not my soul. His was the flesh and soul of a divine man: Jesus Christ the Lord who is God; of one being with the Father. His flesh and soul were as much one as our own selves are one completeness. Jesus was man and God completely, and this one complete Jesus was born of Mary. She bore God. The reason the Orthodox and the Catholics teach this theology of the Theotokos is to affirm the belief that Jesus Christ was God.
Exactly. :)

As for the other things mentioned in this thread that have little to to with the subject of Theotokos: We (Catholics) believed the pope was infallible before the 19th century. We didn't have to define it as truth until people started to think otherwise. It was never defined before hand simply because it typically wasn't questioned.
For the sake of the blessed Theotokos I will plead the 5th! (that's the no comment one, and not something to do with jay-walking or something off-the-wall, right?)

Same thing with Theotokos. No one had to ascribe the title of God-Bearer to Mary until people began to doubt that Jesus was truly God and truly man at the same time and in the same person. You don't see stop signs at busy intersections until someone causes a fatality either.
Co-Sign

But having been a protestant it does take some getting used to. When I first heard a general explanation of Nestorianism I sort of agreed with Nestorias until, well, I found out he was a heretic and then I wondered why for.

Lies can be so subtle...
 
Aug 25, 2009
46
0
0
#7
gotta agree with jgrig on this one. the immaculate conception thing only appears in what, 2 books of the whole new testament, and sure seem to have been added later to line up with the old testament "prophecies".
but what i really wanted to add is a quote from a great movie, Dogma.

Bethany: Jesus didn't have any brothers or sisters. Mary was a virgin.
Rufus: Mary gave birth to CHRIST without having known a man's touch, that's true. But she did have a husband. And do you really think he'd have stayed married to her all those years if he wasn't getting laid? The nature of God and the Virgin Mary, those are leaps of faith. But to believe a married couple never got down? Well, that's just plain gullibility.
 
T

thefightinglamb

Guest
#8
Mary was not the mother of God the Father...

And God is a trinity...

Therefore Mary is not the mother of The Son, the Father, and the Holy Spirit.

She is the 'mother' in a physical way of Jesus Christ thats it...Jesus is not spiritually descended from Mary, nothing she did gave or earned her the right to bear Christ...She is the most 'blessed' among women because the Lord God chose to bless her, not because of her will or that her body naturally gave birth to Jesus...that never would have happened...it was the Holy Spirit coming upon her that made her pregnant, to think she is the mother of the Holy Spirit or the mother of God the Father here breaks down just like the eucharist breaks down at the last supper when Jesus has not yet suffered, and his body is right there before them and not broken yet... But anyway, the Holy Spirit gave birth to Jesus in Mary through the Holy Spirit...She is not and never will be the Mother of G** I don't even want to write that blasphemy...Jesus never even calls her his mother but instead refers to her as 'woman' read the Bible...I know my mom would find that offensive, but instead its just a truth...she is not even Jesus' mother spiritually just physically, Spiritually he is immaculately from God and not from her...it is rediculuos to think that the God-part of Jesus was given to Him by Mary...its even more absurd than saying I am directly spiritually descended from my mother and father, which is not true...the Bible says we do not know how the Spirit comes to the body in the womb...and even so, I am a specific me that is vastly and even infinitely different than either my mother and father and in-a-sense everyone, because I am a specific person...but with Jesus this is infinitely more poignant, because God made known that it was not to be from Mary or from Joseph that Jesus came to be...but it was from God and from Him alone that Jesus' Spirit came to Mary's flesh...

But because the Holy Spirit was in Mary's womb, you could say she was 'a mother of G**' if by that statement you meant simply that she gave physical birth to Jesus who naturally had the Spirit of God in Him...but could not the same be said of John's mother? Lol...In the Bible it says that John the Baptist was filled with the Holy Sprit from his mother's womb, therefore she is also a 'God-bearer' and she also could be called a mother of G** according to the Catholic church, because she gave birth to John the Baptist who had the Holy SPirit, so physically she gave birth to God in the wacky catholic train of thought...

Not meaning offense in saying wacky, but thats the truth of how I see it.

may the Lord bless us all
tony
 
Last edited:
Jan 8, 2009
7,576
23
0
#9
Why don't you also pay tribute to the grandmother of God, the brother of God, the sister of God, the third cousin twice removed of God?
 
T

thefightinglamb

Guest
#10
On Mary, I was reading in Mark just now and found Mark 3: 33-35 to be insightful, now you Catholics don't blink a bit in reading this...

"Who are my mother and my brothers?" he asked.
"Then he looked at those seated in a circle around him and said, "Here are my mother and my brothers! Whoever does God's will is my brother and sister and mother."

The word left out of this list is obviously 'father' as there is only One spiritual Father, God the Almightly...but anyway, these verses occur after Jesus' mother and his brothers* wanted to see him because they thought he was crazy...And this is his response...that those who do God's will are his mother!!!!!!!! This is a profound thought that takes much musing for me even now...I wonder what this means even now...but it is obviously a rebuttal of the statement that his physical mother and brothers were his family more than the people that are his followers...and Jesus says his followers are actually the ones who are his brother and sister and mother...I wonder even why the word 'or' is not used instead of 'and' but I often meditate on this verse...

So the Lord considers everyone who does the will of God to be his brother and sister and mother...hmmm...

Any Christian therefore could be considered Jesus' mother according to these verse...

God bless
tony

*I wonder why catholics still translate this word brothers, but insist it means close relatives, like cousins, even though a proper traslation would just say 'cousins'
 
Last edited:

dscherck

Banned [Reason: persistent, ongoing Catholic heres
Aug 3, 2009
1,272
3
0
#11
Why don't you also pay tribute to the grandmother of God, the brother of God, the sister of God, the third cousin twice removed of God?
My daughter is named Anne Marie. After the grandmother and mother of Our Lord respectively. :)

And we all honour the holy prophet John the Baptist, who was a cousin of Our Lord.
 
I

iraasuup

Guest
#12
My daughter is named Anne Marie. After the grandmother and mother of Our Lord respectively. :)

And we all honour the holy prophet John the Baptist, who was a cousin of Our Lord.

What?????


You're not actually serious?
 

dscherck

Banned [Reason: persistent, ongoing Catholic heres
Aug 3, 2009
1,272
3
0
#13
Why wouldn't I be serious? What's wrong with naming my daughter after the mother of Jesus and her mother?
 
S

suaso

Guest
#14
Well, St. Anne (Mother of Mary) is given some attention just as the other fine folks with a nice St. before their names...

But Mary, Mother of God, is the only human being in history to have ever been a creature made by God (the Father), espoused to God (the Holy Spirit), and the mother of God (the Son). That's why we think she is pretty dang important.

And before anyone does a back flip, when I say espoused, I reference the fact that she concieved Jesus by the power of the Holy Spirit, which in absolutely no way is meant to be understood as 'had intercourse with' as I have had some people assume I meant in other circumstances.

And before anyone asks/accuses: No, Roman Catholics and the Eastern Orthodox do not worship Mary.

:D
 
Aug 25, 2009
46
0
0
#15
catholics do pray to mary. "hail mary...". sure sounds like worship doesnt it.
 

dscherck

Banned [Reason: persistent, ongoing Catholic heres
Aug 3, 2009
1,272
3
0
#16
J

jgrig2

Guest
#17
Just posting it (wiki) for the general masses to consume... Anyone serious will probably look beyond wikipedia for more info.




I thought so to but I see why it's most probably the other way around. It's misleading not to call Mary the Mother of God.




You'll find no disagreement there (though we probably have a differing views on Original Sin).



... that would be Roman Catholics.



I'll disagree on that one.



Yeah, this is an Eastern Orthodox study on the Theotokos. The Roman Catholics don't have a monopoly on her. Thought I'd offer up the Orthodox position.


Thank you :)
Yes but the main reason for the Orthodox posistion on Mary is not because of Mary but it has to do with complex Christoloigcal issues regarder the realtionship between the Human and divine nature. That is the difference
 
Jul 17, 2009
353
0
0
#18
On Mary, I was reading in Mark just now and found Mark 3: 33-35 to be insightful, now you Catholics don't blink a bit in reading this...

"Who are my mother and my brothers?" he asked.
"Then he looked at those seated in a circle around him and said, "Here are my mother and my brothers! Whoever does God's will is my brother and sister and mother."

The word left out of this list is obviously 'father' as there is only One spiritual Father, God the Almightly...but anyway, these verses occur after Jesus' mother and his brothers* wanted to see him because they thought he was crazy...And this is his response...that those who do God's will are his mother!!!!!!!! This is a profound thought that takes much musing for me even now...I wonder what this means even now...but it is obviously a rebuttal of the statement that his physical mother and brothers were his family more than the people that are his followers...and Jesus says his followers are actually the ones who are his brother and sister and mother...I wonder even why the word 'or' is not used instead of 'and' but I often meditate on this verse...

So the Lord considers everyone who does the will of God to be his brother and sister and mother...hmmm...

Any Christian therefore could be considered Jesus' mother according to these verse...

God bless
tony

*I wonder why catholics still translate this word brothers, but insist it means close relatives, like cousins, even though a proper traslation would just say 'cousins'
If you listened to the little half hour audio study it addresses most of these knee-jerk assumptions on the blessed Theotokos. Uses scripture n stuff.

That's why I posted it. Figured if anyone listened to it, a dialogue might take place that went beyond tired protestant assumptions, but then the boards just wouldn't be the same...

:p

God bless
 
Apr 23, 2009
2,253
5
0
#19
gotta agree with jgrig on this one. the immaculate conception thing only appears in what, 2 books of the whole new testament.
All Christians agree that Jesus was immaculately concepted. What the Catholics teach is that Mary was also and that she was sinless. This is where they are off base and it does not teach that any where in scripture. But Jesus was born of a virgin that is not in dispute. (not by any true believer at least)
 
Aug 25, 2009
46
0
0
#20
the real question is, did adam and eve have bellybuttons.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.