Is John Mcarthur guilty of heresy?

[Xeno.of.athens]

Seems oddly interesting to see so many Protestants defending an ancient heresy in their effort to deny that Mary is Jesus's mother and that because Jesus is God it follows that the incarnation means Mary is the mother of God, as is stated in the Creeds.

 

[ozso]

Seems oddly interesting to see so many Protestants defending an ancient heresy in their effort to deny that Mary is Jesus's mother

That's not what's happening.

and that because Jesus is God it follows that the incarnation means Mary is the mother of God, as is stated in the Creeds.

The problem simply exists in that a lot or most of the time "God" is used when referring to all three persons of the Godhead. But Mary is not of course the mother of the Godhead.

 

[FenderTL5]

That's not what's happening.

The problem simply exists in that a lot or most of the time "God" is used when referring to all three persons of the Godhead. But Mary is not of course the mother of the Godhead.

Post 397 is Nestorian heresy.
If anyone aligns themself in agreement or defense with such; it's exactly what's happening.

 

[ozso]

Post 397 is Nestorian heresy.
If anyone aligns themself in agreement or defense with such; it's exactly what's happening.

What does that have to do with what I said?

 

[dzheremi]

There are only two positions that are attested to regarding this question in entire history of the Church (no matter who you take "the Church" to be in this case, because the positions really are that clear):

That St. Mary is Theotokos (this is the position of the Orthodox, the Roman Catholics, and the vast majority of Protestants)

Heresy (this is the position of the Church of the East/Nestorian/Persian Church, who have historically preferred to say that St. Mary is "Christotokos", thereby separating Christ into two according to the two natures of which He is composed, as they argued, as people in this thread have argued, that since St. Mary is not the mother of Jesus' divinity, she cannot properly be called Mother of God. That's hogwash, of course, but that's what they said and say.)

 

[Gregory Thompson]

That St. Mary is Theotokos (this is the position of the Orthodox, the Roman Catholics, and the vast majority of Protestants)

I would say the vast majority of protestants do not have any such belief of a Mary whose prayers bring salvation.

Even in the case of agreement that Jesus is God and Mary is Jesus' Mother, they would not agree that Mary's prayers save them.

Mary furthermore did not give birth to the Father or the Holy Spirit.

The Father sent the Holy Spirit after the death of the Son.

Mary only gave birth to Jesus, her prayers do not save us.

However, Jesus lives to intercede for us.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

I would say the vast majority of protestants do not have any such belief of a Mary whose prayers bring salvation.

I wonder how anyone can claim to know what the vast majority of Protestants believe or do not believe given the enormous variation between Protestant groups.

Even in the case of agreement that Jesus is God and Mary is Jesus' Mother, they would not agree that Mary's prayers save them.

Odd that you say that, neither do Catholic believe such a thing.

Mary furthermore did not give birth to the Father or the Holy Spirit.

What an odd thing to say; no one asserts that Blessed Mary is mother of the Holy Spirit or the Father, it's an absurd claim to make.

The Father sent the Holy Spirit after the death of the Son.

I think I can guess what you intend by this statement, perhaps you can explain it further so that we can be more sure of it.

Mary only gave birth to Jesus, her prayers do not save us.

"Only"? Yet the angel announced that she was most blessed because she was was to give birth to the holy one, the Christ, who is Lord.

 

[Mark Quayle]

Post 397 is Nestorian heresy.
If anyone aligns themself in agreement or defense with such; it's exactly what's happening.

Well, no, actually, it is not. It is only saying that Jesus' humanity was born of Mary, but God did not begin with Mary.

 

[Neostarwcc]

Well, no, actually, it is not. It is only saying that Jesus' humanity was born of Mary, but God did not begin with Mary.

Sorry to butt into my own thread again but isn't denying that Mary gave birth to a fully divine, fully mortal human teaching Neostorianism? That's what MCarthur said to distance himself as much from the Catholic Church as possible.

Whatever happened to the Protestants that wanted what the first generation Protestants like Luther and Calvin wanted? To reform the Catholic church and bring Catholics and Protestants together.

That just isn't the case anymore and it's sad. Almost all Protestants today want to distance themselves as far as possible from the Catholic Church as if reforming the church today would make Protestants a bunch of heathens. And as if Catholics have the bubonic plague or something. I'm getting a little sick of Baptists bad talking the Catholic Church as if they are a bunch of Godless and heretical heathens.


Not all Catholics are bad. And you're not going to get the pope to change his position by calling Catholics unsaved heretics. We should be uniting the church not dividing it.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

Well, no, actually, it is not. It is only saying that Jesus' humanity was born of Mary, but God did not begin with Mary.

Since exactly no one suggests that God didn't exist until Jesus was born of Blessed Mary isn't your post just boxing with a phantom of your own imagination?

 

[JohnD70X7]

In addition to his deity (morphe theos huparchon) God the Word took upon himself the additional nature of humanity.
That additional nature gestated in the womb of the virgin maiden Miryam bat Eli.

So the Word united Himself with human nature, but He Himself didn't gestate in the womb of Mary, just His human nature?

Would you, then, agree with the following statement: The Word was united to a man, so that there are two: one Divine who has always existed, co-existing with one who is human. So that we could say that there are, in a sense, two sons: there's the Son of God, the Logos and there is the human son of Mary. Would you agree with that general statement?

And while I am probably giving away my cards here, I should be transparent that yes, this is a trap question. Even still, I want you to be honest, do you agree with the above?

And to those reading who think they know what I'm trying to get at here, yes you're correct.

-CryptoLugheran

Look, I've answered your inquiries already.
Word gymnastics to preserve a belief system that is not true (namely that God has a mother) in keeping with Catholic traditions frankly bores me.
No matter how you try to categorize or spin it, God the Word preexisted all of creation and therefore has no mother.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

Word gymnastics to preserve a belief system that is not true (namely that God has a mother) in keeping with Catholic traditions frankly bores me.

Your posts are a modern revival Nestorianism. Nestorianism is a heresy rejected by the Church in the fifth century AD. Why your posts revive it is not interesting to me. It is a heresy and as such is properly condemned. Wikipedia says, "Nestorius and his teachings were eventually condemned as heretical at the Council of Ephesus in 431, and again at the Council of Chalcedon in 451. His teachings were considered as heretical not only in Chalcedonian Christianity, but even more in Oriental Orthodoxy.[6]"

 

[Gregory Thompson]

Look, I've answered your inquiries already.
Word gymnastics to preserve a belief system that is not true (namely that God has a mother) in keeping with Catholic traditions frankly bores me.
No matter how you try to categorize or spin it, God the Word preexisted all of creation and therefore has no mother.

The word became flesh and lived among us. So it is written. This word of God was born through a human mother and named Jesus.

 

[dzheremi]

I would say the vast majority of protestants do not have any such belief of a Mary whose prayers bring salvation.

That's not the question. The question is "Is St. Mary the Theotokos?" (birth-giver to God)

On that question, I believe that the answer has been historically and is currently yes for the vast majority of Protestants. Generally speaking, belief in St. Mary's status as the mother of God did not go away among Protestants. They merely reject what they say are Roman Catholic innovations about her, which is not the same thing as recognizing that she is the Theotokos (since the RCC did not invent that belief in any way, shape, or form).

Even in the case of agreement that Jesus is God and Mary is Jesus' Mother, they would not agree that Mary's prayers save them.

Again, that is not the question.

Mary furthermore did not give birth to the Father or the Holy Spirit

And honoring St. Mary as the Theotokos does not say that she did. Protestants who understood what it meant to call St. Mary the mother of God (like the aforementioned Luther) endorsed using this term in translation to refer to St. Mary. Those who understand it properly still today follow Luther (and indeed all the pre-reformation fathers who stood firm on this point) in this.

It seems by your reply that you are mostly attempting to argue against things that do not pertain to whether or not it is appropriate and orthodox to call St. Mary Theotokos.

 

[Gregory Thompson]

That's not the question. The question is "Is St. Mary the Theotokos?

It's a loaded question. So breaking down the meaning is important so we don't generalize.

The title of word Theotokos carries with it all the teaching about Theotokos, including what is said in liturgy about her prayers bringing salvation.

Yes myself and protestants believe that, Mary is the Mother of Jesus, but that is where the similarity of belief ends.

 

[dzheremi]

Word gymnastics

Disregarding the 'gymnastics' bit, what do you usual use to convey your ideas? Do you belong to the world's first telepathic church?

to preserve a belief system that is not true (namely that God has a mother) in keeping with Catholic traditions frankly bores me.

It is one of the least uniquely (Roman) Catholic traditions that there is. You just don't know anything about what you're rejecting, and don't want to learn, so it's easier to mislabel it as 'Catholic tradition' so that you can toss it into the bin without a second thought. Doesn't your fidelity to God deserve better than such laziness and ignorance?

No matter how you try to categorize or spin it, God the Word preexisted all of creation and therefore has no mother.

Jesus Christ is the divine Logos incarnate. Does the incarnation mean nothing to you?

 

[Mark Quayle]

Sorry to butt into my own thread again but isn't denying that Mary gave birth to a fully divine, fully mortal human teaching Neostorianism? That's what MCarthur said to distance himself as much from the Catholic Church as possible.

Whatever happened to the Protestants that wanted what the first generation Protestants like Luther and Calvin wanted? To reform the Catholic church and bring Catholics and Protestants together.

That just isn't the case anymore and it's sad. Almost all Protestants today want to distance themselves as far as possible from the Catholic Church as if reforming the church today would make Protestants a bunch of heathens. And as if Catholics have the bubonic plague or something. I'm getting a little sick of Baptists bad talking the Catholic Church as if they are a bunch of Godless and heretical heathens.


Not all Catholics are bad. And you're not going to get the pope to change his position by calling Catholics unsaved heretics. We should be uniting the church not dividing it.

I never took MacArthur to say that Jesus was not fully God —just that Mary was not the cause of Jesus' divinity. MacArthur would pretty angrily (I think) protest to anyone saying he denies the divinity of Christ.

Nor would he be stupid enough to claim that Jesus became God at some point, before or after birth.

 

[dzheremi]

It's a loaded question. So breaking down the meaning is important so we don't generalize.

It's not a loaded question; it's a very simple question: is St. Mary the mother of God or not, in your theology?

There are many things in Roman Catholic theology in particular that I disagree with, but they don't really affect how I see saints and other Biblical figures. For instance, I don't hesitate to venerate St. Peter as the prince of the apostles just because the RCC has developed an entire ecclesiology around claims they make to continuity with him that I disagree with. I don't understand what prevents you or anyone from making such distinctions, so as to not 'throw out the baby with the bath water', as the saying goes.

The title of word Theotokos carries with it all the teaching about Theotokos, including what is said in liturgy about her prayers bringing salvation.

That's certainly part of it for Orthodox believers (though my particular Orthodox Church does not phrase things that way, preferring instead to highlight the efficacy of her intercessions, and to ask God through said intercessions to forgive us our sins). Just the same, I'm not sure that you can say that retroactively, because I know that each church's form of Marian prayer developed over time to be the way it is now. So I don't that it's true that word itself necessarily would carry all that, because not all churches have that exact form of prayer to begin with, and the way that that particular prayer developed would be unique to the Eastern Orthodox, as far as I know. (I've never seen that wording in any English translations of Syriac or Armenian prayers I've looked at either, though it could be there in some that I haven't seen, or some different, perhaps more Chalcedonian-influenced translations.)

Yes myself and protestants believe that, Mary is the Mother of Jesus, but that is where the similarity of belief ends.

Does this preclude you from affirming that she is the mother of God? If so, why?

 

[Mark Quayle]

Since exactly no one suggests that God didn't exist until Jesus was born of Blessed Mary isn't your post just boxing with a phantom of your own imagination?

Perhaps. I'm just trying to fathom all the consternation going on here. Trying to think of any reason to object to what MacArthur obviously meant, besides RCC etc dogma that God the Son was begotten of Mary.

 

[FenderTL5]

..isn't denying that Mary gave birth to a fully divine, fully mortal human teaching Neostorianism?

Exactly, Yes.
Nestorius: The Virgin Mary is not the Mother of God (Theotokos) because she gave birth to the human Jesus, not the divine God.
He instead used the term Christotokos

The word became flesh and lived among us. So it is written. This word of God was born through a human mother and named Jesus.

That is precisely what is meant by the term Theotokos.
She gave birth to God the Word; Theotokos.