Catholic Heresy (for the record)

[Elin]

At first glance, it seems the label of Mary as the "Mother of God" is blasphemous, since God is a Trinity of Father, Son and Holy Spirit. But the Gospel tells us that the God being referred to here, in which Mary is a mother of, is the second person of the Trinity, Jesus and not the whole trinity. Knowing that Jesus is God, we can rightly label Mary as the "Mother of God" being conscious that the God here is the second person of the Trinity.

So we have two choices:
1. Declaring Mary as "Mother of God" being conscious that the God here is the second person of the Trinity; or
2. Declaring Mary as "Mother of Jesus" being conscious that Jesus is God and is the second person of the Trinity.

The first option serves *so many* purposes than the second, in terms of preaching the Gospel.

First, it makes the mystery of Incarnation (the central mystery of Christianity, aside from the Trinity) so fully alive. Anyone who has not encountered Christianity hearing the phrase "Mother of God" will be compelled to ask: How can a God, an eternal Being, has a mother? Then we can answer him: God's love is tremendous that He came down to us, as a baby born in Bethlehem, to redeem us of our sins and reunite us again with the Triune God, the thing Adam and Eve lost in the Fall. So the three words "Mother of God" captures this mystery of incarnation. The Word made flesh.

Second, the phrase automatically profess the divinity of Christ, and removes the early heresy saying that Jesus is only human, not divine. This heresy is still alive today (e.g. Jehova's Witnesses), and hence the Church has been battling this heresy for a very long time. Proponents of this heresy even uses the Bible to prove that Jesus is only human. (This is one of the flaws of denying the living Magisterium and just subscribe to private interpretation of the Bible). So in declaring Mary as "Mother of God", we are putting forward Christ's divinity, not just a required awareness.

Third, officially calling Mary as the "Mother of God" separates us from these "christians" who deny Christ's divinity, since all of them (e.g. Jehova's Witnesses) declares Mary as a mother of Jesus, but without the additional conviction that Jesus is God.

Fourth, the title prevents the error of Nestorianism, the teaching that Christ's humanity and divinity are disunited. This heresy gives us two Jesuses: one human and one divine. The error is that we have two beings: one is created, and one is uncreated. But Jesus is only one, and he is 100% human and 100% divine. We cannot say that Mary gave birth to only the human Jesus because there is only one Jesus, and this includes his divinity. At some point, before the Second Person of the Trinity is born, the Second Person of the Trinity is purely spirit. After He is born, then he is now 100% human and 100% divine. So in a way, choosing Mary as "Mother of Jesus" with the attached reason that Mary gave birth to the human Jesus, then one has fallen to the error of Nestorianism.

All these reasons of choosing Mary as "Mother of God" is really Christ-centered. We don't call Mary as "Mother of God" as if she has supernatural powers above the Triune God. I don't see anything wrong calling Mary as "Mother of God" with the awareness that this God is Jesus.

We call Mary as the "Mother of God" because she gave birth to Jesus, our Lord, Saviour and ultimately, God.

So in the context of the meaning of "Lord" in Lk 1:42-46,

what does Elizabeth mean when she, full of the Holy Spirit (Lk 1:41),

declares Mary is "the mother of my Lord"?

 

[Elin]

Body yes blood not quite so fast.
The blood comes from the Father. Pseudo science and pseudo religion what a dynamic combination.
Makes for a pseudo believer.

Developmentally and genetically, the blood comes from the father?

What kind of pseudo science is that?

 

[notuptome]

Developmentally and genetically, the blood comes from the father?

What kind of pseudo science is that?

Simple paternity testing is based on the fact that the offspring has the blood type of the father.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[Elin]

Developmentally and genetically, the blood comes from the father?

What kind of pseudo science is that?

Simple paternity testing is based on the fact that the offspring has the blood type of the father.

Which proves zip, and
common blood type with the father doesn't conclude blood comes only from the father.

Mary was not a surrogate mother.
She gave birth to her own seed.

 

[notuptome]

Which proves zip, and
common blood type with the father doesn't conclude blood comes only from the father.

Mary was not a surrogate mother.
She gave birth to her own seed.

The virgin birth necessitates that Jesus did not receive His blood line from any earthly father.

Mary was a vessel just like the cup that holds the wine. God fashioned a body for Himself that He might redeem man back to Himself.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[Elin]

If Mary is a surrogate mother, then Jesus is not of us. Jesus is a human being and received His humanity, His flesh and blood through Mary.
That is what was offered on the cross and that is what brought salvation to us.

Pseudo-gnostic nonsense never seems to die.

Body yes, blood not quite so fast. The blood comes from the Father. Pseudo science and pseudo religion what a dynamic combination. Makes for a pseudo believer.

There is no virtue in believing that which is untrue or unbiblical no matter how dearly held.

Thread continues below in its sequence.

Developmentally and genetically, the blood comes from the father?

What kind of pseudo science is that?

Simple paternity testing is based on the fact that the offspring has the blood type of the father.

Which proves zip, and
common blood type with the father doesn't conclude blood comes only from the father.

Mary was not a surrogate mother.
She gave birth to her own seed.

The virgin birth necessitates that Jesus did not receive His blood line from any earthly father.

That is correct, and has nothing to do with blood coming only from the father.

Mary was a vessel

Mary was a vessel like every other mother who gives birth is a vessel.

Your first statement above in bolded blue is pure nonsense,

and so is your conclusion that Mary was not the mother of the Messiah.

You are not credible.

 

[Maynard]

Thread continues below in its sequence.


Mary was a vessel like every other mother who gives birth is a vessel.

Your first statement above in bolded blue is pure nonsense,

and so is your conclusion that Mary was not the mother of the Messiah.

You are not credible.

While Roger obviously is not credible on any level, you are terribly mistaken that Mary is just "like every other Mother".

She (Elizabeth) exclaimed with a loud voice, “Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the child in your womb!
And who am I that the mother of my Lord should come and visit me?"
- Luke 1:42-43

That ain't just any woman, my good sista Ellin.

 

[kennethcadwell]

While Roger obviously is not credible on any level, you are terribly mistaken that Mary is just "like every other Mother".

She (Elizabeth) exclaimed with a loud voice, “Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the child in your womb!
And who am I that the mother of my Lord should come and visit me?"
- Luke 1:42-43

That ain't just any woman, my good sista Ellin.

Yes, but our Lord Jesus Christ says the same thing about us. Blessed is those who have not seen and still believe.

 

[Elin]

Body yes, blood not quite so fast. The blood comes from the Father.
Pseudo science and pseudo religion what a dynamic combination. Makes for a pseudo believer.

There is no virtue in believing that which is untrue or unbiblical no matter how dearly held.

Mary was a vessel like every other mother who gives birth is a vessel.

Your statement above in bolded blue is

pure nonsense, and so
is your conclusion that Mary was not the mother of the Messiah.

You are not credible.

While Roger obviously is not credible on any level,
you are terribly mistaken that Mary is just "like every other Mother".

She (Elizabeth) exclaimed with a loud voice, “Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the child in your womb!
And who am I that the mother of my Lord should come and visit me?"
- Luke 1:42-43

That ain't just any woman, my good sista Ellin.

Read it again. . .there were qualifications regarding vessel.

 

[Elin]

While Roger obviously is not credible on any level,
you are terribly mistaken that Mary is just "like every other Mother".

She (Elizabeth) exclaimed with a loud voice, “Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the child in your womb!
And who am I that the mother of my Lord should come and visit me?"
- Luke 1:42-43

That ain't just any woman, my good sista Ellin.

Yes, but our Lord Jesus Christ says the same thing about us. Blessed is those who have not seen and still believe.

Scripture states further that "all generations shall call me blessed."

 

[Maynard]

....

Read it again. . .there were qualifications regarding vessel.

THanks

 

[didymos]

Yes!

Mary is the Ark of the New Covenant.

Praised be Jesus Christ!

Then you should venerate Jesus' clothing too... oh wait... you DO!

 

[Maynard]

Then you should venerate Jesus' clothing too... oh wait... you DO!

Just then a woman who had been subject to bleeding for twelve years came up behind him and touched the edge of his cloak. She said to herself, “If I only touch his cloak, I will be healed.” Jesus turned and saw her. “Take heart, daughter,” he said, “your faith has healed you.”
- Mat. 9; 20-22

Praised be Jesus Christ, now and forever!

God bless you, didymos.


Venerate - to regard with reverential respect.

 

[notuptome]

Thread continues below in its sequence.


Mary was a vessel like every other mother who gives birth is a vessel.

Your first statement above in bolded blue is pure nonsense,

and so is your conclusion that Mary was not the mother of the Messiah.

You are not credible.

Passion has clouded your vision. Your argument has become circular. Jesus is Jehovah God in the flesh. God is without beginning or end.

Mary did not conceive the life within her womb. The Holy Spirit conceived the life within Mary's womb. Blessed because she was chosen out of all the young Jewish women of her generation. Mary could no more take credit for Jesus birth than a believer can take credit for their salvation today.

Jehovah God fulfilled His promise to send His Redeemer to save us from our sins. God did it all. I cannot understand the need to elevate Mary to some sacred status.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[Elin]

Body yes, blood not quite so fast.
The blood comes from the Father.
Pseudo science and pseudo religion what a dynamic combination.
Makes for a pseudo believer.

There is no virtue in believing that which is untrue or unbiblical
no matter how dearly held.

Mary was a vessel like every other mother who gives birth is a vessel.

Your statement above in bolded blue is pure nonsense,

and so is your conclusion that Mary was not the blessed mother of the Messiah.

You are not credible.

Passion has clouded your vision. Your argument has become circular. Jesus is Jehovah God in the flesh. God is without beginning or end.

Mary did not conceive the life within her womb. The Holy Spirit conceived the life within Mary's womb.

Jesus was born of Mary's seed.

And your statement quoted in the bolded blue above is still pure nonsense.

Blessed because she was chosen out of all the young Jewish women of her generation.
Mary could no more take credit for Jesus birth

Straw man. . .your methodology betrays your religious persuasion.

Not only Mary, but no one, can take credit for God's blessing upon them.

than a believer can take credit for their salvation today.

Marvellous grasp of the obvious. . .

Jehovah God fulfilled His promise to send His Redeemer to save us from our sins. God did it all.
I cannot understand the need

Nor can I.

to elevate Mary to some sacred status.

Straw man. . .your methodology betrays your religious persuasion.

Nor can I understand the need to deny that Mary was the blessed mother of the Messiah.

 

[notuptome]

Straw man or woman. . .your methodology betrays your religious persuasion

Said the pot to the kettle. It's a lot of whistle and a lot of steam but no substance.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[didymos]

... “If I only touch his cloak, I will be healed.” Jesus turned and saw her. “Take heart, daughter,” he said, “your faith has healed you...”
- Mat. 9; 20-22.

So her FAITH healed her, not the cloak.

 

[Elin]

Body yes. . .blood not quite so fast.
The blood comes from the Father.

Pseudo science and pseudo religion what a dynamic combination.
Makes for a pseudo believer.

There is no virtue in believing that which is untrue or unbiblical
no matter how dearly held.

Mary was a vessel like
every other mother who gives birth is a vessel.

Your statement above in bolded blue is pure nonsense,

and so is your conclusion that Mary was not the blessed mother of the Messiah.

You are not credible.

Mary did not conceive the life within her womb. The Holy Spirit conceived the life within Mary's womb.

Jesus was born of Mary's seed (Ge 3:15).

I cannot understand the need to deny
that Mary was the blessed mother of the Messiah.

Said the pot to the kettle. It's a lot of whistle and a lot of steam but no substance.

Non-responsive. . .and assertion without demonstration is without merit.

You have not addressed your pseudo science above about blood coming from the father only,

nor have you addressed Jesus coming from Mary's seed in Ge 3:15.

Methinks the pot is calling the kettle black.

 

[notuptome]

Non-responsive. . .and assertion without demonstration is without merit.

You have not addressed your pseudo science above about blood coming from the father only,

nor have you addressed Jesus coming from Mary's seed in Ge 3:15.

Methinks the pot is calling the kettle black.

Circular reasoning. You argue simply for the sake of arguing.

The blood has always been through the father and not the mother. All of Jewish culture the heritage follows the father not the mother.

Gen 3:15 has no real bearing on Christ. All seed is through the woman's womb. It is a very broad and all encompassing statement not unlike Abrahams seed. In Gen 3:15 God is addressing not Mary but Eve.

The blood type always follows the father. My children have the same blood type as me. My sons will have children that will have the same blood type as them. My daughter will have children that have the same blood type as their father.

I'm not going to google blood typing for you as you are an adult and capable of doing it on your own.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[john17]

So her FAITH healed her, not the cloak.

Yes, her faith healed her, *through* the cloak. God uses material things to convey his graces. Just like Naaman instructed was instructed to dip his body 7 times in Jordan to be healed. When Moses was instructed to create bronze serpent so that anyone who looks at it will be healed. This is the nature of the sacraments, they channel God's graces through the material things. (Naaman's having to dip 7 times is a foreshadowing of the 7 sacraments on Church).

Trying to bypass this material things as channel of graces is Gnosticism, the atmosphere of mainstream Protestantism today. This is false since God could have saved us in so different ways, but He choses to save us through having a physical body.

We have been saved by faith *through* his flesh.