Mary, the mother of God

[Browncoat]

Uhm... I don't know how else to explain it so that you'll get what I'm saying.

Maybe logically? It defies logic to say Yeshua is G-d, but that Mary is not the mother of G-d because you can't give birth to G-d...even though Yeshua is G-d.

 

[lil-rush]

Maybe logically? It defies logic to say Yeshua is G-d, but that Mary is not the mother of G-d because you can't give birth to G-d...even though Yeshua is G-d.

I have been using nothing, but logic. Maybe I'm not arriving at the conclusion that would please you, but I am still presenting a logical argument.

 

[Browncoat]

I have been using nothing, but logic. Maybe I'm not arriving at the conclusion that would please you, but I am still presenting a logical argument.

It has nothing to do with saying something I agree with. I just don't understand how he can be G-d, and yet she not be the mother of G-d, despite bearing him, being called in scripture his mother, being called by HIM "mother", etc.

Can you explain how that is logical? That might be a better starting point.

 

[aspen]

Here is something I would like to add.

Many Protestants like to believe that Mary conceived only the human part of Jesus and God conceived the God part. The problem, of course, is that Mary would have had to supply the egg and the sperm in order for this to be true. Also, Jesus is fully God and fully man, you cannot separate the two without lapsing into heresy - His flesh and His spirit were fully God and human.

 

[lil-rush]

It has nothing to do with saying something I agree with. I just don't understand how he can be G-d, and yet she not be the mother of G-d, despite bearing him, being called in scripture his mother, being called by HIM "mother", etc.

Can you explain how that is logical? That might be a better starting point.

I think we're going on different definitions of logic. Logic is just a way of presenting an argument. One can have strong, weak, moderate, fallacious, etc logic, but it's still logic. I would appreciate it more if you said my conclusion was wrong instead of saying it is illogical, because I work very hard to present logical arguments.

Example of a logical argument in standard form:
All men are mortal
Socrates is a man
Socrates is mortal

Example of one of my arguments in standard form:
Man cannot create a spirit
God is a spirit
Man cannot create God

following that argument:
Birth is a form of creation
Human mothers give birth to human babies
Human mothers create human babies

combining those two arguments:
Man cannot create a spirit
Man can create human babies
Human Babies are not spirits

and so we have:
Mary is part of mankind
Mary cannot give birth to spirits
Mary did not give birth to God

logical. Maybe you think some of the premises are wrong, but that makes my argument weak. That does not make it illogical. They are valid(the impossibility of having all true premises and a false conclusion) arguments, they are logical.

So, I say once again, I would appreciate it if you told me I am wrong instead of telling me my argument is illogical.

 

[Browncoat]

I think we're going on different definitions of logic. Logic is just a way of presenting an argument. One can have strong, weak, moderate, fallacious, etc logic, but it's still logic. I would appreciate it more if you said my conclusion was wrong instead of saying it is illogical, because I work very hard to present logical arguments.

Example of a logical argument in standard form:
All men are mortal
Socrates is a man
Socrates is mortal

Example of one of my arguments in standard form:
Man cannot create a spirit
God is a spirit
Man cannot create God

following that argument:
Birth is a form of creation
Human mothers give birth to human babies
Human mothers create human babies

combining those two arguments:
Man cannot create a spirit
Man can create human babies
Human Babies are not spirits

and so we have:
Mary is part of mankind
Mary cannot give birth to spirits
Mary did not give birth to God

logical. Maybe you think some of the premises are wrong, but that makes my argument weak. That does not make it illogical. They are valid(the impossibility of having all true premises and a false conclusion) arguments, they are logical.

So, I say once again, I would appreciate it if you told me I am wrong instead of telling me my argument is illogical.

Logic was a bad word then I guess, because I didn't mean your argument was poor. That much was logical. The information, not so much.

How about we try nonsensical? It doesn't make sense to say that Yeshua is G-d and that Mary is his mother, but that she is not the mother of G-d.

 

[giantone]

Here is something I would like to add.

Many Protestants like to believe that Mary conceived only the human part of Jesus and God conceived the God part. The problem, of course, is that Mary would have had to supply the egg and the sperm in order for this to be true. Also, Jesus is fully God and fully man, you cannot separate the two without lapsing into heresy - His flesh and His spirit were fully God and human.

It all is through the blood sin came upon mankind through the blood and the man, Marry supplied the egg God supplied the sperm and the baby developed independent of the mother's blood with his own blood supply. Jesus was fully human and fully God but not because Marry was sinless. His mortal body died and was raised a spiritual body not born of Marry. The two genealogies in the gospels are for Joseph and Marry and only Marry's genealogy qualified to produce the savior.

Also was our spirits born of our parents?

 

[pickles]

Mary was the mother to Jesus.
Hopefully Ill find the scripture again or maby someone here can now.
But Just before Jesus had the last supper, didnt he say to Mary that she was not his mother but mother to all?
There are many interesting conclusions that can be made by this.
God bless, pickles

 

[Jordan9]

Marianism ought forever to be reserved - where it already is - with other perpetually rejected doctrines such as Universalism, Purgatory and Annihilationism. These are called "Minority Christian Doctrines" for a reason; particularly due to the quantity of verses in opposition.

Quest

Heh, actually the Marian Doctrines (I'll assume that's what you mean by "Marianism") are held by more Christians than those who reject them. The Catholic Church (1.2 billion) accepts them, the Orthodox Churches (210 million) do as well. Compared to 540 million Protestants, 26 million nontrinitarians and 1 million Nestorians.

I'd hate to employ any logical fallacies here, but it is hard to ignore the company that Protestants share when it comes to Mary and her place in Creation. Why is it that those who deny Jesus' divinity and those who deny Mary's role in the Salvation of humanity find common ground? Aspen answered this in his first post quite succinctly: to deny the latter is to deny the former, and vice-versa.

 

[Jordan9]

Mary was the mother to Jesus.
Hopefully Ill find the scripture again or maby someone here can now.
But Just before Jesus had the last supper, didnt he say to Mary that she was not his mother but mother to all?
There are many interesting conclusions that can be made by this.
God bless, pickles

Yes, that is true as well. Many Christians throughout history and even today have referred to her as a sort of surrogate mother to all Christians.

 

[MahogonySnail]

I think single parents might relate to God better if they see him as a single father figure without a mother.

 

[QuestionTime]

"Right is right, even if everyone is against it; and wrong is wrong, even if everyone is for it."- William Penn, English Quaker leader and founder of Pennsylvania, 1644-1718

Good, quote. You go ask Mr. Penn or any of his Quaker friends if he/they think Mary is the Mother of God.

Quest

 

[QuestionTime]

But if Yeshua is G-d, his man part doesn't matter. He is still G-d, Mary still gave birth to him, Mary is still called his mother, therefore Mary is the mother of G-d.

Perhaps reading John Wesley's "A Plain Account of Christian Perfection" will help you to understand why St. John says that he was just as Jesus is in this world. Just give it a Google.

Jesus was a man filled with the Holy Spirit but without any sinful corruption in His mind or body. Christians who are filled with the Holy Spirit are likewise partakers of Jesus' divine nature. However, due to the corruption of sin our mental and physical faculties are imperfect in comparison.

Quest

 

[QuestionTime]

Maybe logically? It defies logic to say Yeshua is G-d, but that Mary is not the mother of G-d because you can't give birth to G-d...even though Yeshua is G-d.

God is the Father of God, Mary is the Mother of the Son of Man. Jesus calls Himself repeatedly "the Son of Man." He never called himself the Son of a divine woman, or the Son of the Mother of God.

By calling Himself the Son of Man, He places His Mother where she belongs - as a human - else He wasn't the "Son of Man." He can't be both.

Quest

 

[QuestionTime]

I have been using nothing, but logic. Maybe I'm not arriving at the conclusion that would please you, but I am still presenting a logical argument.

If logic was sufficient, the Reformation would have been the end of the Catholic Church.

Quest

 

[QuestionTime]

Logic was a bad word then I guess, because I didn't mean your argument was poor. That much was logical. The information, not so much.

How about we try nonsensical? It doesn't make sense to say that Yeshua is G-d and that Mary is his mother, but that she is not the mother of G-d.

What I find to be nonsensical is how we can explain repeatedly why Mary is not the Mother of God and people still keep asking, how can't she be the Mother of God?

This debate reminds me of this particular scripture:

Matthew 22:42-46 (Jesus asks the question
42Saying, What think ye of Christ? whose son is he? They say unto him, The son of David.
43He saith unto them, How then doth David in spirit call him Lord, saying,
44The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool?
45If David then call him Lord, how is he his son?
46And no man was able to answer him a word, neither durst any man from that day forth ask him any more questions.


This is exactly the same scenario, if Jesus is David's son, how can He be Lord over David? Well, we know the answer; Jesus is God and He existed long before David did. Does that make David the Father of God? Nope, but he is a flesh relation; just like Mary.


Of course you don't give David the glory that you give Mary, and there is no sensible reason for that, because the Bible has much more wonderful things to say about him than it ever does Mary. The Bible I am almost certain mentions that Jesus is David's Son more often than it says Jesus is Mary's Son.


Time to cut the mysticism out of Christianity.



Quest

 

[QuestionTime]

Why is it that those who deny Jesus' divinity and those who deny Mary's role in the Salvation of humanity find common ground?

I have never heard such a thing. No group on earth has worked harder to deny the divinity of Christ than the Jesuits, yet they are the first to raise Mary to divine status.

Quest

 

[phil36]

What I find to be nonsensical is how we can explain repeatedly why Mary is not the Mother of God and people still keep asking, how can't she be the Mother of God?

This debate reminds me of this particular scripture:

Matthew 22:42-46 (Jesus asks the question
42Saying, What think ye of Christ? whose son is he? They say unto him, The son of David.
43He saith unto them, How then doth David in spirit call him Lord, saying,
44The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool?
45If David then call him Lord, how is he his son?
46And no man was able to answer him a word, neither durst any man from that day forth ask him any more questions.


This is exactly the same scenario, if Jesus is David's son, how can He be Lord over David? Well, we know the answer; Jesus is God and He existed long before David did. Does that make David the Father of God? Nope, but he is a flesh relation; just like Mary.


Of course you don't give David the glory that you give Mary, and there is no sensible reason for that, because the Bible has much more wonderful things to say about him than it ever does Mary. The Bible I am almost certain mentions that Jesus is David's Son more often than it says Jesus is Mary's Son.


Time to cut the mysticism out of Christianity.





Quest

Well said question time.

 

[Belgian_Pilot]

I'd like to add this (don't shoot me if you disagree, just my opinion):

Jesus came to our world. In our world we are made of flesh and blood. Mary was mother of Jesus as a human. Jesus was killed. Yet He raised from the death. That prooves that Jesus is much more than only a human of flesh and blood. He is the Son of God (spiritual). He is much more than we can imagine. Mary is never called mother of Jesus or God in that way. She was His mother as a human, when He came to earth in service of mankind. (Isn't that wonderful? )

Maybe Mary is a saint. Who knows? Who decides? God does. Not my problem

 

[phil36]

Here is an interesting statement, It just goes to show that even the marian dogma was never finally articulated until the 1950, and even at that, there where calls for pope John Paul to have Mary called ''co-redemptrix'' although he did no do it, the doctrine is intwined into Romanist doctrine.

read the flollowing:

The belief in the corporeal assumption of Mary was formally declared to be dogma by Pope Pius XII in 1950. Pope Pius XII states in Munificentissimus Deus: "We pronounce, declare, and define it to be a divinely revealed dogma: that the Immaculate Mother of God, the ever Virgin Mary, having completed the course of her earthly life, was assumed body and soul into heavenly glory. Hence if anyone, which God forbid, should dare willfully to deny or to call into doubt that which we have defined, let him know that he has fallen away completely from the divine and Catholic Faith." This is an example of an invocation of papal infallibility.

Now, I have highlighted three serious issues above, none of which can be backed by scripture. some of these things we find in later writings which are not inspired and usually come from an overly zealous thought againt Nosterius heresy.

and also note that the Pope condemns anyone who disagrees, since the papal bull is infallible!!

The only thing infallable is God's word, anything from men is fallible.

phil