If Mary is not the Mother of God, then Jesus Christ her Son is not God.

[eternally-gratefull]

2. God (unknown which one) became man.
Dear eternallygratefull,
No. It is not unknown. God the Son became man. The Word, the Logos, the Son, became man. Don't you read the Bible: John 1:1ff.
The Word became flesh and dwelt among us (human beings), full of grace and of truth. Which person of God became man? God the Son. Are you denying that the Word (John 1:1) became a man? In Erie PA Scott R. Harrington

No I am not denying the word. Yet once again you have done what you always do. Even in our conversations here I have never denied God the son became Christ. so yet once again your trained thinking has you convinced I am saying something you have read over and over is not true.

Dear eternallygratefull, Which Scripture says Christ God the Son "set aside his diety" (that is, Deity)? That is not in the Bible.

Scott. When scripture says the son "emptied himself" what do you think it means? what did he empty himself of??

If Christ set aside His Deity, He could not have worked miracles. Miracles come from God.

I guess you skipped the part where jesus worked miracles by the power of God onfd not his own power. If Jesus had his diety, he could have worked them under his own power. He would not need the holy spirits help to do anything. The fact he did proves he left his diety aside.

Only in the Old Testament did men who were not God work miracles by the power of God, but they didn't work the miracles like Jesus worked. Jesus' miracles were unique. He did greater works than all the prophets of the OT and Moses. In Erie PA Scott R. Harrington

Yeah he did. But not of his own power (diety) but under the pwer of the HS. Again, if Jesus had his diety. he would have done them under his own power.

No my view does not say that God can not take the form of man. I have said since day one he did. But you can't see what I say, because your stuck in what you have been taught as to who mary is, and as to what everyone who does not agree with you believes. It is called being spoonfed. You believe this. This is what they believe, This is what they will say. This is why they are wrong. So when someone says something other than what you are told they will say, your confused. You say they say things they never said. and say they reject something they never rejected.

This is what is happening. The whole world can see it Scott!! Thats why I talk so much to you. I don't have to think to respond to you. I just let you respond, then show your inconsistencies, and your fabrications of what others say. And then you say I don't believe something. which I have said over and over I do. And everyone gets to see it. Which is a good thing

And one again you have just proved this point.

 

[Digital_Angel_316]

Scott:

I really do not see that you can claim both the Nicene Creed and the idea that Mary is the
mother of God. I do believe good sir, that it would be you that is heretical here. Let's look
at the history a bit:


In its first few centuries, the Christian community faced serious threats on a number of
fronts. One of these threats was the horrible persecution until the Edict of Toleration
(311). Another of these threats was a series of intellectual and heretical challenges that
came from within and without the church. The church sought to address these challenges
through gatherings of bishops known as “Councils.”

The Orthodox Church identifies itself as the “Church of the Seven Councils,” fully affirming
the doctrines delineated through the first seven ecumenical councils. Generally,
Protestants subscribe to the decisions of at least the first six of these councils. In fact,
the councils have played a major role in forging the basic doctrines of the Trinity held by
Christians today. The first and fourth councils are especially significant in this regard. The
seventh council, which deals with icons, is by and large not accepted by Protestants.

The first council came in response to the “Arian” controversy. Around 321, Arius, an
influential priest from Alexandria, began to teach that Jesus Christ was not fully God
himself, but was a created being. The local bishop, Alexander, refuted Arius’ claim
regarding Christ, insisting that the Son is uncreated and coeternal with the Father.

At Emperor Constantine’s request, some three hundred bishops, mostly from the Greek
speaking East, gathered in 325 in Nicea in council to resolve the issue. Led by a young
deacon named Athanasius,the Council decided in favor of Alexander’s view, affirming that
Jesus was “true God of true God, begotten not made, of one substance (homoousios) with
the Father,” as stated in the Nicene Creed.

This is not to affirm the Nicene Creed as a "Doctrinal Statement" but to address the
particular issue of Flesh giving birth to flesh vis a vis, those born again in spirit - Mary
being the mother of God, versus Mary (motherhood) being a vessel by which flesh creates
flesh.

General History of Eastern Orthodoxy

 

[Scotth1960]

No I am not denying the word. Yet once again you have done what you always do. Even in our conversations here I have never denied God the son became Christ. so yet once again your trained thinking has you convinced I am saying something you have read over and over is not true.

Dear eternallygratefull,
You said "God cannot be born". What Scripture says that? Don't you know what you are saying? Are you saying God the Son, Jesus Christ, cannot be born?
Please clarify. In Erie Scott R. Harrington



Scott. When scripture says the son "emptied himself" what do you think it means? what did he empty himself of??

Eternallygratefull,
Christ did not cease being God. God is eternal. For Christ to have ceased being God while He was a man would mean He is not eternal. Christ emptied Himself in that He took the form of a real man, a Servant. It does not mean He emptied Himself of His Divinity. God can't cease being God. Christ is God. Your understanding is incorrect. How can Deity cease being Deity when it becomes human? God united Himself to humanity in God the Son, Jesus Christ. He didn't cease being God.
That is heresy.
In Erie Scott R. Harrington


I guess you skipped the part where jesus worked miracles by the power of God onfd not his own power.

Dear Eternallygratefull.
Christ is God the Son. Don't you believe He is "true God from true God", "begotten, not made", of "one substance with the Father, by Whom all things were made?
Christ said, "Unless ye believe that I AM He [God], ye shall die in your sins."
Are you saying Christ did not claim to be God the Son?
In Erie PA Scott R. Harrington


If Jesus had his diety, he could have worked them under his own power. He would not need the holy spirits help to do anything. The fact he did proves he left his diety aside.



Yeah he did. But not of his own power (diety) but under the pwer of the HS. Again, if Jesus had his diety. he would have done them under his own power.






And one again you have just proved this point.

Eternallygratefull,
PS Please learn to spell things correctly; the word is Deity, not "diety". There is no word such as "diety".
Scott H.

 

[Scotth1960]

Scott:

I really do not see that you can claim both the Nicene Creed and the idea that Mary is the
mother of God. I do believe good sir, that it would be you that is heretical here. Let's look
at the history a bit:


In its first few centuries, the Christian community faced serious threats on a number of
fronts. One of these threats was the horrible persecution until the Edict of Toleration
(311). Another of these threats was a series of intellectual and heretical challenges that
came from within and without the church. The church sought to address these challenges
through gatherings of bishops known as “Councils.”

The Orthodox Church identifies itself as the “Church of the Seven Councils,” fully affirming
the doctrines delineated through the first seven ecumenical councils. Generally,
Protestants subscribe to the decisions of at least the first six of these councils. In fact,
the councils have played a major role in forging the basic doctrines of the Trinity held by
Christians today. The first and fourth councils are especially significant in this regard. The
seventh council, which deals with icons, is by and large not accepted by Protestants.

The first council came in response to the “Arian” controversy. Around 321, Arius, an
influential priest from Alexandria, began to teach that Jesus Christ was not fully God
himself, but was a created being. The local bishop, Alexander, refuted Arius’ claim
regarding Christ, insisting that the Son is uncreated and coeternal with the Father.

At Emperor Constantine’s request, some three hundred bishops, mostly from the Greek
speaking East, gathered in 325 in Nicea in council to resolve the issue. Led by a young
deacon named Athanasius,the Council decided in favor of Alexander’s view, affirming that
Jesus was “true God of true God, begotten not made, of one substance (homoousios) with
the Father,” as stated in the Nicene Creed.

This is not to affirm the Nicene Creed as a "Doctrinal Statement" but to address the
particular issue of Flesh giving birth to flesh vis a vis, those born again in spirit - Mary
being the mother of God, versus Mary (motherhood) being a vessel by which flesh creates
flesh.

General History of Eastern Orthodoxy

Dear "Digital Angel":
1. What's your point?
2. Why "Digital"?
3. What's the true Gospel?
4. You stopped short of the Third Ecumenical Council, Ephesus. of 431 AD, which did declare Mary "Theotokos", and "Mother of God".
5. What about a "General History" of the many many Protestant denominations?
It would problem take more time than we have in just one brief lifetime.
In Erie PA Scott R. Harrington

 

[jandian]

Is the point of this thread for us to pay credence to Mary? What was your intention when you started this thread?

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Scott:

I really do not see that you can claim both the Nicene Creed and the idea that Mary is the
mother of God. I do believe good sir, that it would be you that is heretical here. Let's look
at the history a bit:


In its first few centuries, the Christian community faced serious threats on a number of
fronts. One of these threats was the horrible persecution until the Edict of Toleration
(311). Another of these threats was a series of intellectual and heretical challenges that
came from within and without the church. The church sought to address these challenges
through gatherings of bishops known as “Councils.”

The Orthodox Church identifies itself as the “Church of the Seven Councils,” fully affirming
the doctrines delineated through the first seven ecumenical councils. Generally,
Protestants subscribe to the decisions of at least the first six of these councils. In fact,
the councils have played a major role in forging the basic doctrines of the Trinity held by
Christians today. The first and fourth councils are especially significant in this regard. The
seventh council, which deals with icons, is by and large not accepted by Protestants.

The first council came in response to the “Arian” controversy. Around 321, Arius, an
influential priest from Alexandria, began to teach that Jesus Christ was not fully God
himself, but was a created being. The local bishop, Alexander, refuted Arius’ claim
regarding Christ, insisting that the Son is uncreated and coeternal with the Father.

At Emperor Constantine’s request, some three hundred bishops, mostly from the Greek
speaking East, gathered in 325 in Nicea in council to resolve the issue. Led by a young
deacon named Athanasius,the Council decided in favor of Alexander’s view, affirming that
Jesus was “true God of true God, begotten not made, of one substance (homoousios) with
the Father,” as stated in the Nicene Creed.

This is not to affirm the Nicene Creed as a "Doctrinal Statement" but to address the
particular issue of Flesh giving birth to flesh vis a vis, those born again in spirit - Mary
being the mother of God, versus Mary (motherhood) being a vessel by which flesh creates
flesh.

General History of Eastern Orthodoxy

Dear "Digital Angel":
1. What's your point?
2. Why "Digital"?
3. What's the true Gospel?
4. You stopped short of the Third Ecumenical Council, Ephesus. of 431 AD, which did declare Mary "Theotokos", and "Mother of God".
5. What about a "General History" of the many many Protestant denominations?
It would problem take more time than we have in just one brief lifetime.
In Erie PA Scott R. Harrington

what about scripture?

Oh wait thats right. that takes a back seat to all the other things you look to for guidance. i am sorry.

 

[Digital_Angel_316]

PS I don't see the word "Digital Angel" in the Bible, so your own name is not Biblical. perhaps you should re-name your log in name before you start criticizing the Roman Catholics for their veneration of Mary. Why should we take you seriously when you can't even use your own birth given name your parents gave you?

(1) Scott: I don't see the word "theotokos" in the Bible, so the name is not Biblical. perhaps you should use a Bible name (VESSEL) before you start criticizing ...

Scott said --"... criticizing ...The Roman Catholics for their veneration of Mary. Why should we take you seriously when you can't even use your own birth given name your parents gave you?"

* You see Scott, now what? Are you a Catholic?? I thought you said in no way were the Orthodox and Catholics Uniting?

* Scott, Why should we take Roman Catholics or Eastern Orthodox seriously? The KGB, The Mafia, The Masons, The Skull and Bones, The Talmudic Jews, Baal Worship -- The Kingdom of heaven taken by force, Mithra??

Scott said:
Dear "Digital Angel":
1. What's your point? (see above)

2. Why "Digital"? (You are now in a Digital Universe online)

3. What's the true Gospel? (Jesus, THE WAY)

4. You stopped short of the Third Ecumenical Council, Ephesus. of 431 AD, which did
declare Mary "Theotokos", and "Mother of God". (see (1) above -- your reasoning)

5. What about a "General History" of the many many Protestant denominations?
It would problem take more time than we have in just one brief lifetime. (I agree, so we
stick with the Bible and it's proper interpretation)


Scott, I would invite you to investigate some of the fundamental Christian Churches that
you may find to your liking. While I cannot offer any particular religion or church, you
may find a SMALL, LOCAL, even a home church situation where you can find and
investigate with an open mind and heart the revelation of Jesus to you and for you. My
best wishes are with you as you seek, but not in your teachings as such in Christian Chat.
I pray you read the Bible, search, explore and let the Holy Spirit work in your heart and
mind and that you will ultimately find peace, in JESUS -- THE WAY.

Some have come out of the Catholic and Orthodox church, you may investigate their
ministries and testimonies -- and hopefully get past the bickering as such online, that has
been going on for over 1500 years. As an Othodox, perhaps a third order novitiate, non
regular, or the new third order systems might be something you could investigate to
start ... Again, I cannot suggest or recommend them per se (in and of themselves), but
you may find a glimmer of a calling there. We all need to start somewhere.

Scott, it is not you and I that matter, it is Scripture and God's will for us, as revealed in
Jesus.

Regards, Digital_Angel_316

 

[SantoSubito]

what about scripture?

Oh wait thats right. that takes a back seat to all the other things you look to for guidance. i am sorry.

Nope Scripture is a larger part of an organic whole. Catholics use the three legged stool analogy to describe it, and without one of the legs the whole stool falls down. The Orthodox also have something similar

1). Sacred Scripture.

2). Sacred Tradition.

3). Living Magisterium.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Nope Scripture is a larger part of an organic whole. Catholics use the three legged stool analogy to describe it, and without one of the legs the whole stool falls down. The Orthodox also have something similar

1). Sacred Scripture.

2). Sacred Tradition.

3). Living Magisterium.

The problem is, even when so called 'sacred tradition) is not supported by scripture. or appears to contradict scripture. you still hold it as fact from God. this is a dangerous view. the same view the jews held. why would we make the same mistake.

living magisterium? I hope you mean Christ. because all men are bound to make mistakes. even mistakes in interpretation. Peter spoke of this in his second epistle. saying men who were in the church would twist the words of God to their own destruction. To say Go will remove a man's free will and force him to interpret correctly is to say God is not the god of Love he says he is. God will not force anyone to do what he does not want to. he can try to lead him the right way, (like he did Jonah), He can try to help a man see what is true. but he is not going to force any man to do what he does not want to do.

God did not force peter to interpret his word right and offend the gentiles by not eating meat. god allowed peter to make the mistake. Peter took Gods chastisement and repented (even though he did not have to)

in the same token. if Augustine wanted to insert pagan beliefs in scripture. god would not stop him. if any pope wanted to interpret anything wrong. god is not going to stop him. The danger is that the pope has the rule of the church. and his followers follow him blindly. so all it would take is one pope, one bishop to of his own free will change scripture. Add to it, or distort it. And the whole church would follow him and accept this gospel as truth from God. Because they falsely believe God would force any man to not falsely interpret his own word.

This is as bad as the Calvinist who teaches that a man who God did not chose would never accept Christ. even if he wanted to. Because God would force him against his will to not believe.

Both lies come from the same area. the pride of men.

 

[pshiva222_k]

yes..no worship of Mary

 

[dscherck]

yes..no worship of Mary

I agree. Good thing us Catholics and the Orthodox don't do that!

 

[kujo313]

One objective of "sacred tradition" seems to fill in the 'holes" that seem to be left. There are no 'holes". There is nothing to fill in. It doesn't matter wether or not Mary had other children or remained a virgin. It doesn't matter what Jesus did between the ages of 13 and 30.

What DOES matter is that Jesus is THE Way to God. What matters is that God was doing His Will at His time.

How, then, do you expect to love God with your "all", as Jesus said was the greatest commandment, and not give Him 100% of the honor and glory in the conception and birth of Jesus? Nobody really needs to care what happened to Mary after that but that she followed Jesus.

"If Mary is not the Mother of God, then Jesus Christ her Son is not God." Jesus is STILL God through the Holy Spirit. Period.

To put ANY focus on anything outside THAT is to deny that Jesus is God.

If you love your "mommy" THAT much, then join a pagan religion.

 

[Digital_Angel_316]

Nope Scripture is a larger part of an organic whole. Catholics use the three legged stool analogy to describe it, and without one of the legs the whole stool falls down. The Orthodox also have something similar

1). Sacred Scripture.

2). Sacred Tradition.

3). Living Magisterium.

NOTO BENE ("NOTE WELL" (NB) FOR NON LATIN SPEAKERS) --

YOUR Sacred tradition in calling a woman the mother of god, is rooted and grounded in
the Cults , sure they are "Universal" Cults, but cults nonetheless. The Statues, the Icons,
the Parading of Idols, the Worship of secretly impregnating a young woman is MITHRA as
we know it commonly today. I posted a number of other nations, religions, cultures who
all did the same ... that is NOT "Sacred"-- it is -- SACRILEGIOUS! It is not rooted in the
Bible other than the warnings against Tamuz and the Wailing Wall.

 

[SantoSubito]

One objective of "sacred tradition" seems to fill in the 'holes" that seem to be left. There are no 'holes". There is nothing to fill in. It doesn't matter wether or not Mary had other children or remained a virgin. It doesn't matter what Jesus did between the ages of 13 and 30.

What DOES matter is that Jesus is THE Way to God. What matters is that God was doing His Will at His time.

How, then, do you expect to love God with your "all", as Jesus said was the greatest commandment, and not give Him 100% of the honor and glory in the conception and birth of Jesus? Nobody really needs to care what happened to Mary after that but that she followed Jesus.

"If Mary is not the Mother of God, then Jesus Christ her Son is not God." Jesus is STILL God through the Holy Spirit. Period.

To put ANY focus on anything outside THAT is to deny that Jesus is God.

If you love your "mommy" THAT much, then join a pagan religion.

Thats actually not the role of Sacred Tradition at all, sure it sometimes "fills in holes". But if were to be honest you fill in the gaps too, you just always fill it in "contra Romanus Catholicus". But for the most part we don't believe that just because you love the Saints and Mary, you somehow love God less.

 

[Scotth1960]

No I am not denying the word. Yet once again you have done what you always do. Even in our conversations here I have never denied God the son became Christ. so yet once again your trained thinking has you convinced I am saying something you have read over and over is not true.
Dear eternallygratefull, You said several times, "God can not be born". What Scripture says that?
In Erie PA Scott R. Harrington

 

[eternally-gratefull]

No I am not denying the word. Yet once again you have done what you always do. Even in our conversations here I have never denied God the son became Christ. so yet once again your trained thinking has you convinced I am saying something you have read over and over is not true.
Dear eternallygratefull, You said several times, "God can not be born". What Scripture says that?
In Erie PA Scott R. Harrington

The scripture that says God was before time began. The scripture that says he was in the beginning. Christ himself when he said before Abraham was I AM. there are many scripture which say Jesus did not have a beginning with Mary. Born means beginning.

Jesus body was born. He entered that body. But God was not born. Nor was he crreated. to say he was born is to insinuate he is created.

 

[SantoSubito]

The scripture that says God was before time began. The scripture that says he was in the beginning. Christ himself when he said before Abraham was I AM. there are many scripture which say Jesus did not have a beginning with Mary. Born means beginning.

Jesus body was born. He entered that body. But God was not born. Nor was he crreated. to say he was born is to insinuate he is created.

Born does not mean beginning, I existed from the point I was conceived; I came into the world when I was born. To say he is born is not insinuate he is created. Christ's divinity has no beginning or end, but Christ as God-man has a beginning, and that beginning was from the point he was conceived.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Born does not mean beginning, I existed from the point I was conceived; I came into the world when I was born. To say he is born is not insinuate he is created. Christ's divinity has no beginning or end, but Christ as God-man has a beginning, and that beginning was from the point he was conceived.

You still had a starting point even if you believe it was conceived. Before you were conceived. you were not in existance. God did not have a starting point. He always was. To say he was concieved or born is insinuating he had a starting point. He did not. Even Christ admitted this when he said before Abraham was. I AM. I Am was him saying he never had a beginning. He existed before Abraham was on earth. Which means he existed before Mary was even thought of.

Why would Jesus say he (as he was) existed before abraham if he did not? and if he existed before abraham, how can mary be the mother of God when mary was not even born yet?

 

[SantoSubito]

You still had a starting point even if you believe it was conceived. Before you were conceived. you were not in existance. God did not have a starting point. He always was. To say he was concieved or born is insinuating he had a starting point. He did not. Even Christ admitted this when he said before Abraham was. I AM. I Am was him saying he never had a beginning. He existed before Abraham was on earth. Which means he existed before Mary was even thought of.

Why would Jesus say he (as he was) existed before abraham if he did not? and if he existed before abraham, how can mary be the mother of God when mary was not even born yet?

You missed my point Jesus' deity has always been and will always be, but Jesus Christ as God-man had a beginning.

 

[Warrior44]

One objective of "sacred tradition" seems to fill in the 'holes" that seem to be left. There are no 'holes". There is nothing to fill in. It doesn't matter wether or not Mary had other children or remained a virgin. It doesn't matter what Jesus did between the ages of 13 and 30.

What DOES matter is that Jesus is THE Way to God. What matters is that God was doing His Will at His time.

How, then, do you expect to love God with your "all", as Jesus said was the greatest commandment, and not give Him 100% of the honor and glory in the conception and birth of Jesus? Nobody really needs to care what happened to Mary after that but that she followed Jesus.

"If Mary is not the Mother of God, then Jesus Christ her Son is not God." Jesus is STILL God through the Holy Spirit. Period.

To put ANY focus on anything outside THAT is to deny that Jesus is God.

If you love your "mommy" THAT much, then join a pagan religion.

Its interesting to me how some people can say that it doesn't matter what happened to Mary after the birth of Jesus, she was just another woman, all she did was bring the physical Christ into the world. Yet in the same breath they adamently oppose any thought that she may be blessed after all (like the Bible says) or that she was ever-virgin or that she was the theotokos. If it really doesnt matter, why do you oppose our views?
And as for it not mattering what Jesus did between 13 and 30, thats the Lord you're talking about. The One who created the universe, the One who died on the cross for all mankind. Not to mention he was perfect. I don't know about you but it does matter to me because I want to have a personal relationship with Him and in order to do that i need to know everything I can about him.